2022-05-11: APP 2.0.0-beta 1 has been released !!!
Download links per platform:
[Solved] Analyze Stars across different exposures
I have tried integrating a few times now with exposures of different lengths. I have done this as single session and multi-session. Last night I loaded subs of 10, 30, 60, 120 and 300 seconds of M42, using multisession, to perform an HDR composition.
The 10 second batch went fine, but the other groups all had low #s of stars in a some subs, like 7 stars. Some groups, for example the 120 batch was mostly bad, and some, for example, 300 only had a few like that. Of course, registration went on to fail for those subs. The subs that fail are virtually identical to neighboring subs that went fine. I looked at the star maps for the bad subs, and all that showed was core of M42, blobs that made up 7 or so 'stars,' but none of the real stars showed. The star map for the good subs showed a generous amount of stars, as you'd expect.
I don't understand why the different exposures can't be analyzed and registered together, this has happened several times trying to do this.
I'm restacking now, one group at a time. If all goes as it has before, they'll all register/integrate with no problem. (Will update if not!)
I restacked each set individually, and they all registered/integrated with no problems..
So why not all together?
On which APP version is this happening? Is it one of the beta versions, or is it happening on the latest 1.083 release?
I am assuming that star analysis is giving high star counts but that registration is failing?
It definitely should work all together.
I believe it was 1.083 beta2. I have just upgraded to 1.083 release. It gives a very low count for the bad frames, between 7 and 15 for example, and high counts for the good ones, upwards of 500. The star map is telling, looks as expected for the good frames, lots of stars, but for the bad, it shows only the core of Orion Nebula and a couple surrounding regions, hence few "stars."
H David, okay, do you want me to have a look at the data so we can determine what exactly is happening here and why star analysis is difficult on your data? Are the stars very small or very big for example?
That would be great, I'm uploading right now. As far as I know, they are quite ordinary subs of M42.
I did stack them separately, so star analysis has no trouble like that...
Will advise when they are up in the cloud.
Files are here, all subs, and masters for flats/darks/bias and bad pixel map:
@mabula-admin Did you have a chance to look into this yet? Thanks.
Hi David @davloose,
Apologies for the delay.
Can you please upload your data here:
Use username and password: upload
and make a folder name in which you upload your data, lile: DavidLoose-analyseStarsIssue
Let me know once uploaded and I will check it 😉
I can't and won't use iCloud so I can't access the data there.
They are uploaded, finally! Dark skies == slow internet, out here! Thanks for having a look, @mabula-admin
Hi David @davloose, thank you very much for uploading the data directly to us 😉
The first thing I tested was running all the lights without any calibration frames to exclude the possibility that there is something wrong with the calibration data. As it turns out, all frames give good star counts and registration is flawless. 10 sec frames give starcounts of about 200-300... the higher exposures have star counts of 500 so maxing out with the default max star count of 3) analyse stars.
I will now investigate your calibration data to see if we can explain what happens there and where the problem might be...
Thank you so much!
Hi David @davloose,
Could it be the case that you were running into this issue with one of the beta releases of 1.083 ?
With the latest 1.083 stable release, all works perfectly with and without calibration data. All frames show good star counts and registration is flawless on the whole dataset.
Your calibration data seems to be okay as well.
With the beta releases there was an issue in 3)analyse stars which does explain the problem that you had 😉
Download links for the latest 1.083 stable release are at the top of the forum.
Yes, it was a beta. I'll try it again, I have since upgraded to latest. THANKS!!!