Mar 28 2026 APP 2.0.0-beta40 will be released in 7 days.
It did take a long time to have the work finished on this and it will have a major performance boost of 30-50% over 2.0.0-beta39 from calibration to integration. We extensively optimized many critical parts of APP. All has been tested to guarantee correct optimizations. Drizzle and image resampling is much faster for instance, those modules have been completely rewritten. Much less memory usage. LNC 2.0 will be released which works much better and faster than LNC in it's current state. And more, all will be added to the release notes in the coming weeks...
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.
I just got a new camera and I am in the process of creating a set of Master Calibration files. As part of this process I am creating a new BadPixelMap. After running the Calibrate module APP output two BPM master files BPM-1 and BPM-2. It's been a while since I did this but I do not recall two files being created in the past. When I examine them it only looks like BPM-1 contains any information (BPM-1 shows a lot of bad pixels and BPM-2 doesn't appear to show any). So I have a couple of questions: What are the two files for and is it ok to delete BPM-2 (no apparent info) and just use BPM-1? Thanks
@batch Hi Bill,
What input data are you using for creating the BPM? Are there files that have a different temperature, gain, offset or exposure time than others? Are you loading all data into one session or two? Please try to give us as much information as possible.
Thanks, Wouter
Hi Bill,
have You checked the exposure times in the frame list? I came across a similar issue as the camare reports slightly different exposure times (e.g. 60s vs 61 s), hence APP would create 2 MasterDarks resulting in 2 BPM's.
You can avoid this by unchecking the "seperate darks acc. to exposure time box at the very bottom of tab 2) (You need to watch out not to throw in lights with really different exposure time, though , e.g. 60s vs 120s), which would require individual Masterdarks.
Hope this helps,
Jochen
@wvreeven Hi Wouter
I've tried multiple variations by processing individual channels/single session to multiple channels/single session. All temps and gain are the same on a per channel basis and darks match lights. I have tried setting the BPM parameters myself as well as running it with the automatic option selected. I am using vr 2.0.0beta4. Regardless of what iteration I run it still results in two BPMs being produced. One thing of note is that I am reporting a Hot Pixel count of about 2.7% and 0% Cold pixel count so I'm wondering if BPM-1 which clearly shows multiple pixels is the Hot pixels and BPM-2 which shows nothing (flat white) is the Cold pixels. Would this make sense? If so I could discard BPM-2 and just use BPM-1 going forward.
@jochen-scharmann Hi Jochen,
Thanks very much for the suggestion. I did check the exposure times and everything matches as well and in every instance only one MasterDark was created.Â
Regards,
Bill
