Is there a guide to the most recent Weighted Batch Preprocessing script in Pixinsight.

[Ouroboros]

No prob.  Yeah, I agree. I expect WBPP will become part of my default preprocessing work flow now.  Batch preprocessing has come on enormously since I last tried it when I first got PI a few years ago. I only do OSC but even  so it’s a long old haul doing it manually. And I can really see how those who use RGB and other filters that it’s a godsend. I am so impressed how it keeps track of and combines as appropriate the different types of file. Clever stuff. 

[teoria_del_big_bang]

On 10/09/2022 at 20:25, Ouroboros said:

I'm quite impressed how powerful WBPP has become.  I can see why people say WBPP is the recommended or preferred way to preprocess. But it needs careful setting up and a thorough understanding of what it's doing.  This is going to be a longish learning curve for me.  I'd like to get to the point where I have a typed workflow sheet to follow.  I use a typed workflow sheet to preprocess manually.  It's three pages of typed A4 - and is basically a summary of the preprocess described by Warren Keller in Part 1 of his Inside Pixinsight 2nd Ed. 

I too now love WBPP and like many others when it first appeared I was not too keen but now you can see where they were going all along but I guess the script is mega complicated and so has to be done in steps making sure preliminary thngs work before moving on.

What is an issue with PI in my opinion, is that ever since I bought it it is that it is in continuous development and the amount of processes now is double to what was there originally, many still there but superceeded by newer processes to do the same job. Recently I think this has slowed down apart from the WBPP script which they have worked really hard on.
All this on one hand is great, as without doubt PI is now a much more powerful tool, but on the other hand it has made any sort of 3rd party manual almost impossible.

Maybe one day they will get to the stage where you press a button direct it to the files in one directory and out pops a full colour image. Again this will be controvertial as some peope hate the processing side abd would welcome this and others like the artistic licience processing can give you to make an individual image that appeals to you.

For me WBPP is a Godsend as I was not keen on preprocessing as generally it is a pretty well laid down set of rules what to do and how to do it and if all the data is correct and calibration files present most people would wnd up with exactly the same calibrated images at the end of it so an automated way to do this suits me and the fact you can just select a directory and add keyword if you need to group images to use seperate flats, darks etc is just brilliant. and also add some initial cosmetic correctin as well 🙂 

As for Adam Blocks website that has been the best source of info for me and helped me more than searching for any free videos on Youtube, however, it is another expense and although there are free ones out there the best way is his website.
I guess many either don't want to pay for these videos or can't afford it so I keep saying this but would love to see a subsection of this forum where people could post theor write ups on PI and even full workflows, problem if it is just a new thread then these get lost in and amongs hundreds of questions posed or posts thanking people for their contriutions, it really wants  it so people can ask their write ups to be added to  a locked thread.

Steve

Edited September 14, 2022 by teoria_del_big_bang

[Ouroboros]

Yes, I see what you’re saying there, @teoria_del_big_bang.  So, you have signed up to Adam Block’s program have you? His free stuff seems pretty good  to me so, hopefully, the paid content must be even better.   

[teoria_del_big_bang]

6 minutes ago, Ouroboros said:

Yes, I see what you’re saying there, @teoria_del_big_bang.  So, you have signed up to Adam Block’s program have you? His free stuff seems pretty good  to me so, hopefully, the paid content must be even better.   

Yes I signed up to both the fundementals and horrizons. Quite a bit of money on top of the cost of PI but I have found them great as originally I was struggling and he explains really well what actually happens when you change a certain parameter rather than many of the on-line tutorials that just say set it to this value and tick tis box and so on that means you have no idea what doing that did.
Again trouble is there are so many videos on there difficult to get time to go through them all (I am never happy am I 🙂 ) .

In all honesty though I would really recomend signing up to the fundementals that takes you step by step through all you need to know about PI, and loads on WBPP and he keeps updating  things especially WBPP.
Horizons is good  and there are some advanced stuff on there but a lot is actually taking you through actual workflows and doing full processing an data sets you can download yourself. Like I say its good but I find some of the things very subjective as it is more what he want the finished image to look like and might not be the way you want it to look.
Also there is a small yearly subscription for Horizons whereas Fundementals is a one off payment.

So certainly you would gain knowledge from both  but Fundementals is the most value for money in my opinion and probably enough for most peoples needs.

Steve

[sloz1664]

VisibleDark has a great YouTube video on Pixinsight's updated WBPP script.

https://www.youtube.com/c/VisibledarkAstro

 

Steve

[teoria_del_big_bang]

The more I use the new WBPP the more I love it.
Okay it takes its time (on my PC anyway 🙂 ) but at least now you can see what it is doing as it goes so not just sat there with no response for 2 hours or so, but I like how quick it is now when you just add another nights data to an existing set of data together with some new flats for the new data, it zooms through most of the stuff as it knows it already has preprocessed that and just does the new stuff, it of course has to redo some of the preprocessing and all of the post processing stuff to integrate the new data but it is so much quicker. And using the keywords it is so esy to add new data and flats without having to group manually.

Steve

Edited September 19, 2022 by teoria_del_big_bang

[StuartT]

On 14/09/2022 at 22:21, teoria_del_big_bang said:

 

So certainly you would gain knowledge from both  but Fundementals is the most value for money in my opinion and probably enough for most peoples needs.

Steve

Absolutely agree. I did the Quick Start first, now I am working my way through Fundamentals. It's incredibly thorough and systematic and I feel I am gaining a true understanding, rather than simply which buttons to press. Given the sheer volume of the content (there are lots of video-hours in there) I consider it excellent value. 

I know he has free videos on YouTube, but I find the structured approach in his courses much better as you build your knowledge in a logical way rather than just dipping into youtube to find the answer to one question.

Edited September 21, 2022 by StuartT