› ›

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In

James Goodall

Hi Adam, This is my first message, sorry if it's too long...Thank you for being such an inspiration and helping to make Pixinsight even better! I really enjoy the capturing of data but the processing really isn't as much fun for me. I tend to want to COMPLETELY figure processing ahead of time before wasting any time getting inferior results from my data, but at some point I need to dive in and learn by trial and error. As a terrestrial photographer and artist I have enjoyed the powerful processing in Lightroom. I have been able to get single astro images of (brighter) nebulas and galaxies to look pretty darn nice, but I need to learn Pixinsight to progress further. I really want to get the maximum quality and detail with less data because of time limitations but am willing to acquire dozens of decent quality images (perhaps not hundreds) to process for any given target. I have a bunch of really good astro equipment, over $50,000 worth I imagine - ouch. Everything from the Rokinon 135, to my C11" Edge with HyperStar vs 4 and .7 reducer, etc. and 2 different iOpton 'EC' mounts. I don't want to bore you with those details except to say I am in a bortle 4 zone at 39 degrees Latitude and I can and know how to get decent subs. I am now limited to OSC with my ZWO ASI2600-MC and either no filter (the 2600 MC has a UV/IR cut sensor window), the L-Pro , or the IDAS NBZ for dual band. I have watched most of your YouTube videos at least once. It REALLY bugs me to think that I would waste time getting less precision out of my data than absolutely possible. But having said that, I'm also a sure candidate for more automated scrips like the new WBPP 2+, NSG, RGB alignment, your nice Star de-emphasizer, EZ processing suite, Star Net, etc... One question - If cosmetic correction is applied before debayer it should be able to help remove hot pixels from dithered images because it's before - right? WBPP should do the CC before debayer - does it? I have been trying to figure out why running WBPP with about 40 NGC 7293 Helix images would completely fail and give such bizarre results. I think it's because of the 3 and 5 minute dual-band filter images have hot pixels that are not being removed with CC and also NSG not knowing the meridian flip images were rotated because of the "failed star alignment". Okay, confession,... I'm trying to cheat and not take darks. I only calibrate with lights, flats, dark flats (same 2 second length as the flats) and NO darks. But was hoping that my heavy dither on each sub and CC would get me a good result in calibration despite no darks. Also, the ESD rejection algorithm looks like it could really be superior to the sigma rejections. Can you do a video comparing the results. I hate to think I'm throwing away ANY useful data! Oh, one last comment, I'm sort of committed to the ZWO ASIAIR Pro and Plus. But why doesn't it sometimes populate the fits header FL properly when I'm plate-solving and manually entering the correct FL? Maybe it's mostly with the 1976mm FL of the Edge + .7 reducer but that really bums me out. It's odd because some shorter scopes do populate correctly... That sort of messes with editing although my Nikon D810a doesn't do a fits header right? All the best, James Goodall YouTube link to our high end guitar building business

About

Username
James Goodall
Joined
Visits
0
Last Active
Roles
Member

Activity

  • James Goodall
    Hi Adam,

    This is my first message, sorry if it's too long...Thank you for being such an inspiration and helping to make Pixinsight even better!

    I really enjoy the capturing of data but the processing really isn't as much fun for me. I tend to want to COMPLETELY figure processing ahead of time before wasting any time getting inferior results from my data, but at some point I need to dive in and learn by trial and error.

    As a terrestrial photographer and artist I have enjoyed the powerful processing in Lightroom. I have been able to get single astro images of (brighter) nebulas and galaxies to look pretty darn nice, but I need to learn Pixinsight to progress further.

    I really want to get the maximum quality and detail with less data because of time limitations but am willing to acquire dozens of decent quality images (perhaps not hundreds) to process for any given target. I have a bunch of really good astro equipment, over $50,000 worth I imagine - ouch. Everything from the Rokinon 135, to my C11" Edge with HyperStar vs 4 and .7 reducer, etc. and 2 different iOpton 'EC' mounts. I don't want to bore you with those details except to say I am in a bortle 4 zone at 39 degrees Latitude and I can and know how to get decent subs. I am now limited to OSC with my ZWO ASI2600-MC and either no filter (the 2600 MC has a UV/IR cut sensor window), the L-Pro , or the IDAS NBZ for dual band.

    I have watched most of your YouTube videos at least once. It REALLY bugs me to think that I would waste time getting less precision out of my data than absolutely possible. But having said that, I'm also a sure candidate for more automated scrips like the new WBPP 2+, NSG, RGB alignment, your nice Star de-emphasizer, EZ processing suite, Star Net, etc...

    One question - If cosmetic correction is applied before debayer it should be able to help remove hot pixels from dithered images because it's before - right? WBPP should do the CC before debayer - does it? I have been trying to figure out why running WBPP with about 40 NGC 7293 Helix images would completely fail and give such bizarre results. I think it's because of the 3 and 5 minute dual-band filter images have hot pixels that are not being removed with CC and also NSG not knowing the meridian flip images were rotated because of the "failed star alignment".

    Okay, confession,... I'm trying to cheat and not take darks. I only calibrate with lights, flats, dark flats (same 2 second length as the flats) and NO darks. But was hoping that my heavy dither on each sub and CC would get me a good result in calibration despite no darks.

    Also, the ESD rejection algorithm looks like it could really be superior to the sigma rejections. Can you do a video comparing the results. I hate to think I'm throwing away ANY useful data!

    Oh, one last comment, I'm sort of committed to the ZWO ASIAIR Pro and Plus. But why doesn't it sometimes populate the fits header FL properly when I'm plate-solving and manually entering the correct FL? Maybe it's mostly with the 1976mm FL of the Edge + .7 reducer but that really bums me out. It's odd because some shorter scopes do populate correctly... That sort of messes with editing although my Nikon D810a doesn't do a fits header right?

    All the best,
    James Goodall
    YouTube link to our high end guitar building business

    October 2021