MAY 4 2026: APP 2.0.0-beta44 has been released !
New improved internal memory controls should now work on all computers
May 1 2026: APP 2.0.0-beta43 has been released !
Improved internal memory controls (much more stable and faster on big datasets), fixed CPU image viewer, fixed Narrowband extraction demosaic algortihms.
Apr 29 2026 APP 2.0.0-beta42 has been released !
New improved Normalization engine, Fixed random crashes in integration, fixed RGB Combine & Calibrate Star Colors, fixed Narrowband extraction algorithms, new development platform with performance gains, bug fixes in the tools, etc...
Apr 14 2026: Google Pay, Apple Pay & WeChat Pay added as payment options
Update on the 2.0.0 release & the full manual
We are getting close to the 2.0.0 stable release and the full manual. The manual will soon become available on the website and also in PDF format. Both versions will be identical and once released, will start to follow the APP release cycle and thus will stay up-to-date to the latest APP version.
Once 2.0.0 is released, the price for APP will increase. Owner's license holders will not need to pay an upgrade fee to use 2.0.0, neither do Renter's license holders.
Please help! The integration frame shows artifacts, like shadows of the brighter stars of M 45. The shadows don't show on the individual frames, I checked and rechecked them. I used the default settings of APP, light frames, master flat, dark and bias. MDark and MBias have been used in the past for processing with the same ISO/exposure time without any problem. To nail it down I noticed the first appearance of the shadows after normalisation, and clear shadows after integration. I have no idea what goes wrong. Can anyone help me please? Â
Could you maybe pinpoint as to what you mean with the shadows? I can't see anything really strange, apart from the gradient in the image.
When you click on the image you'll see reflections of the bright stars just above and slightly to the right of the stars.
Thank you, wvreeven, reflections are the right word, and for helping to point at the positions.
Ah right, I was looking for darker artefacts. 😉 Thanks Wouter. So are you sure they are not visible in your single frames? They will show up very faintly probably and when stacked pop out more. It seems extremely likely these are actual reflections in the data, stars look like they have been registered properly and they show up for the brightest of stars, which makes sense as well.
I agree with Vincent. Probably stretching the original light subs VERY much will make them visible there as well. It looks like reflections in the optical train to me.
Â
Wouter
Thank you for dealing with my issue. I went through all my subs again and didn't find anything strange in the original data. I took subs of a different target with the same configuration the same night, and the integration went well as usual. I have no idea what haunts me with M 45. I'd probably better discard the subs and try again.
Do the subs of the other target also contain magnitude 5 and brighter stars? Could you perhaps share one of the raw M 45 subs with us?
Â
Wouter
Yes it would be great if you could upload a single frame for us to have a look at. Nothing really haunts you I'm sure, the stars in this target are extremely bright so that would make sense.
Wvreeven, the subs of the other target don't contain such bright stars. The M45 sub is larger than 30 MB - would resizing affect the 'screening' ? Sorry I'm a newbie - is there any way of preprocessing with APP or taking subs I could 'tame' bright stars against faint nebulosities? The same problem appears e.g.with Flame and Horsehead nebulae and Alnitak.
Perhaps you could use a system like WeTransfer to make a sub available?
I can see the reflection on your stretched image but not on my own ones. I think it's best deleting my M 45 subs and try again another night. Thank you Vincent!
