UPDATE FROM MABULA
I have had a very rough 2 months unfortunately health wise. I was struck 3x in a row with bacterial infections. The second infection occurred after a routine hospital checkup and I became very sick. I had to rest and take a lot of antibiotics. Once I was recovering and restarting work 1 month ago, I again became sick. The infection was not yet gone, so even more antibiotics and rest was needed. Needless to say, it took a lot of my energy and I needed a lot of rest.
Finally, the infection is really gone and my energy is coming back step-by-step now and I have started work again. I am terribly sorry to have kept you waiting for support. I will address all outstanding questions and e-mails step-by step and will be on the forum daily from today.
APP 2.0.0-beta47 will come soon as well, a lot of work was already completed before I became very ill, so the release is also nearly ready for you. Beta47 will be much faster actually. Many workflows will be more than 2x faster, mosaics can even be 10x faster than before because registration really received a major boost... all compared to beta46. Before I release it, I will make sure that everything is working properly and then I will release it.
Hello again,
again I have to struggle with overcorrecting FLATS...
first, with only a integration of LIGHTS I got a relatively flat integration result:
(no Flats etc.); f 4 Newton + ASI 2600 MC.
On location I had no dimmer for the flat field panel so I had to take short FLATS (0.1 s)
I could live with that result (without the FLATs) but have some dust spots which I´d like to be erased.
back home I took the identical LIGHTS plus the calibration Masters of that session (above) which returned an overcorrected integration:
Comparing the FITS Header I do need some help - my exposure settings are: ASI 2600 MC, gain 100, offset 50.
the single FLAT frames show a BZERO of 32768 and an offset of 50:
the Master FLAT / DARKFLAT / BIAS do not show an offset :
can this be a part of the problem?
The more I try to tune settings in APP the weirder the results.
update:
1.
I opened the overcorrected looking files in PI - there they are looking okay = pretty flat - not that overcorrection visible.
2.
In PI I could manage to get a good = flat looking result (of a single LIGHT sub) by adding 0.55 to the MasterFlat and correcting the L by the modified MF.
Using that modified MasterFlat in APP even returned a worse result.
3.
Using the identical data set (L, F, D, B, DF) for an integration in PI returned this result
when opened in APP this PI integration also looks much better than the APP result.
I can work with the PI result, not with the APP result.
So why this big difference?
Any suggestions?
thanks, Peter
