Two questions about PixInsight's Weighted Batch Pre-Processing

[Gumminess8083]

Hello Everyone, I'm currently two weeks into my PixInsight trial and everything is going quite smoothly, except for a few doubts I have regarding the WBPP script.
For context, I use it to align, register, debayer, and drizzle.

 

Here are my questions:

1. Is it normal for the program to ask me to manually input the plate solving data during the pre-processing phase?

This is what I get after the second or third process while running WBPP. I tried looking at some guides on YouTube, but it looks like nobody is getting this popup window... I'ts not a big deal, since I just have to input my target's coordinates and my scope's focal length, but I was wondering if there was some way to input this data before even running the script, so I could just leave my pc to do its thing while I shower, instead of waiting for it to get halfway through and having to manually insert this info.

 

2. Is it normal for my image to look completely washed out when including flats?

The left one only includes darks, lights, and bias; the right one includes darks, lights, flats, and bias; the bottom one includes only lights and was aligned, registered and debayered manually (RGGB), no WBPP involved. Is this normal behavior or are my flats just bad?

 

3. Is it normal for the debayering (applied automatically through WBPP through CFA) to be applied differently depending on whether I have included flats or not?

Same as above: the left one only includes darks, lights, and bias; the right one includes darks, lights, flats, and bias; the bottom one includes only lights and was aligned, registered and debayered manually (RGGB), no WBPP involved.

 

I have included all thrree xisf files, one of my flats, and my master flat in the google drive folder at this link: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/18cx1WOPkg9ABm6TtXX2EKXXzD3k00-ki?usp=sharing

Any help would be appreciated; thank you!

[Synchronicity]

I'm using Astro Photography Tool - APT for image capture and that seems to store the data in the FITS header.  A random image from a couple of nights ago auto populated all the fields in the ImageSolver dialogue box.

Maybe they need set in whatever you are using for capture?

All the best

Michael

 

[Ouroboros]

Re. question 1 does this help? https://pixinsight.com/forum/index.php?threads/wbpp-2-5-1-astrometric-solution-with-dslr-raw.19159/  The comment on the 3rd post is interesting. 

I have not had this problem with WBPP, which presumably means my astrometric data is contained in my FITS’ headers. (Yes, it is. I've just checked). 

How are you capturing your images? DSLR? 

Edited September 25, 2022 by Ouroboros

[Ouroboros]

As for flats, no I wouldn’t consider what you’re seeing as normal in my case.

How are you doing your flats?

Not related to the flat frames issue,  but I’m also wondering why you’re using bias?  Bias are not necessarily needed depending on your setup.  

[Ouroboros]

I hadn't noticed this before but I see that under the Lights tab Astrometric Solution can be switched off.  How vital astrometric solution is to how well WBPP works I don't know. As I recall you don't have to  input astrometric data during manual preprocessing.  

[Gumminess8083]

On 25/09/2022 at 15:50, Synchronicity said:

I'm using Astro Photography Tool - APT for image capture and that seems to store the data in the FITS header.  A random image from a couple of nights ago auto populated all the fields in the ImageSolver dialogue box.

Maybe they need set in whatever you are using for capture?

All the best

Michael

 

Oh, that is probably why, then! The images used for the stack were some of my first shots, still taken with the camera itself rather than through NINA, so it wass missing that data 😅

[Gumminess8083]

On 25/09/2022 at 18:55, Ouroboros said:

I hadn't noticed this before but I see that under the Lights tab Astrometric Solution can be switched off.  How vital astrometric solution is to how well WBPP works I don't know. As I recall you don't have to  input astrometric data during manual preprocessing.  

I replied tot his in my previous comment, but I basically realized that this was happening because the shots I had used came directly from my camera rather than NINA, so they did not include anything in the FITS header!

[Gumminess8083]

On 25/09/2022 at 16:55, Ouroboros said:

As for flats, no I wouldn’t consider what you’re seeing as normal in my case.

How are you doing your flats?

Not related to the flat frames issue,  but I’m also wondering why you’re using bias?  Bias are not necessarily needed depending on your setup.  

Sorry for the late reply, but I forgot to check for answers to this question and, throughout the week, I managed to figure this out on my own! Basically I had taken the flats with the sun at an agle, so they had a nasty shadow covering the top half of the image caused by the dew shield, which threw off the calibration algorithm.

[Ouroboros]

@Gumminess8083  Glad you’re sorted!