15th Feb 2024: Astro Pixel Processor 2.0.0-beta29 released - macOS native File Chooser, macOS CMD-Q fixed, read-only Fits on network fixed and other bug fixes
7th December 2023: added payment option Alipay to purchase Astro Pixel Processor from China, Hong Kong, Macau, Taiwan, Korea, Japan and other countries where Alipay is used.
I’ve run into a drizzle issue in 2.0.0-beta15. The issue did not appear to be resolved in the beta16 version.
I’m on a Dell Windows 10 workstation (Version 10.0.19044 Build 19044) with 32 GB RAM, and an Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E3-1240 v5 @ 3.50GHz, 3504 Mhz, 4 Core(s), 8 Logical Processor(s). Graphics Adapter is NVIDIA Quadro M4000.
All data were captured using a Canon R5 OSC body. For the test cases I loaded all calibration frames (flats, darks, and bias) anew. There were only 10 lights so the case would run faster. My data are undersampled, but were not intentionally dithered on the EQ mount I used. Nevertheless, I think this is a case of something wrong in the code (in concert with my subpar data).
Unless otherwise indicated, all APP processing settings were default:
1) LOAD Tab
I unchecked the top 3 checkboxes
I ran 3 test cases. The first and last produced the expected result. The second test case (using Bayer/X-Trans Drizzle) did not produce the expected result.
The first test case used all default settings (i.e. no drizzle). The result appeared to be normal to my eye. I didn’t bother including that image as it was just a typical, light-polluted result that looked as expected.
The second test case changed the 6) INTEGRATE Tab INTEGRATE mode to Bayer/X-Trans drizzle. This result did not look normal. There was red and green shading (see below).
Below is a 500% zoom that may help in your assessment. That same zoom level on the other 2 images in this test looked as expected. They did not have the red block artifacts.
For reference, I had previously run the full data set of 119 lights, integrating a crop of the Reference Frame, and the red appeared as vertical bands that went through much of the image; the oddities were far more pronounced (see below).
Here is the .fits header data from APP for the second case which exhibited the issue (for reference). Note that I provided the header for the beta15 version. The beta16 software did not appear to resolve the issue.
FITS HDUs: 1
HDU1 - SIMPLE = T / Java FITS: Tue Apr 11 14:04:23 EDT 2023
HDU1 - BITPIX = -32 / bits per data value
HDU1 - NAXIS = 3 / number of axes
HDU1 - NAXIS1 = 8200 / size of the n'th axis
HDU1 - NAXIS2 = 5482 / size of the n'th axis
HDU1 - NAXIS3 = 3 / size of the n'th axis
HDU1 - EXTEND = T / Extensions are permitted
HDU1 - BSCALE = 1.0 / scale factor
HDU1 - BZERO = 0.E0 / no offset
HDU1 - DATE = '2023-04-11T18:23:12' / creation date of Integration
HDU1 - SOFTWARE= 'Astro Pixel Processor by Aries Productions' / software
HDU1 - VERSION = '2.0.0-beta15' / Astro Pixel Processor version
HDU1 - INTEGRAT= 'Integration' / integration of light frames
HDU1 - CFAIMAGE= 'no ' / Color Filter Array pattern
HDU1 - NOTE-1 = 'INTEGRATION METADATA'
HDU1 - EXPTIME = 9.E2 / exposure time (s)
HDU1 - NUMFRAME= 10 / number of frames used in this integration
HDU1 - BG-1 = ' 5.2125E-02' / background estimate of channel 1
HDU1 - BG-2 = ' 1.3887E-01' / background estimate of channel 2
HDU1 - BG-3 = ' 9.0407E-02' / background estimate of channel 3
HDU1 - SCALE-1 = ' 2.9664E-02' / dispersion of channel 1
HDU1 - SCALE-2 = ' 1.0033E-02' / dispersion of channel 2
HDU1 - SCALE-3 = ' 7.4355E-03' / dispersion of channel 3
HDU1 - NOISE-1 = ' 2.8356E-02' / noise level of channel 1
HDU1 - NOISE-2 = ' 2.8735E-03' / noise level of channel 2
HDU1 - NOISE-3 = ' 3.0756E-03' / noise level of channel 3
HDU1 - SNR-1 = ' 9.7136E-01' / Signal to Noise Ratio of channel 1
HDU1 - SNR-2 = ' 4.2730E+00' / Signal to Noise Ratio of channel 2
HDU1 - SNR-3 = ' 2.7735E+00' / Signal to Noise Ratio of channel 3
HDU1 - NOTE-2 = 'NR = Noise Reduction'
HDU1 - NOTE-3 = 'medNR = noise in median frame / noise in integration'
HDU1 - NOTE-4 = 'refNR = noise in reference frame / noise in integration'
HDU1 - NOTE-5 = 'ideal noise reduction = square root of number of frames'
HDU1 - NOTE-6 = 'the realized/ideal noise reduction ratio should approach 1 ideally'
HDU1 - NOTE-7 = 'the effective noise reduction has a correction for'
HDU1 - NOTE-8 = 'dispersion change between the frame and the integration'
HDU1 - NOTE-9 = 'because dispersion and noise are correlated'
HDU1 - MEDNR-1 = ' 1.4185E-01' / median noise reduction, channel 1
HDU1 - MEDNR-2 = ' 1.5745E+00' / median noise reduction, channel 2
HDU1 - MEDNR-3 = ' 1.0722E+00' / median noise reduction, channel 3
HDU1 - REFNR-1 = ' 1.4134E-01' / reference noise reduction, channel 1
HDU1 - REFNR-2 = ' 1.5833E+00' / reference noise reduction, channel 2
HDU1 - REFNR-3 = ' 1.0631E+00' / reference noise reduction, channel 3
HDU1 - IDNR-1 = ' 3.1623E+00' / ideal noise reduction, channel 1
HDU1 - IDNR-2 = ' 3.1623E+00' / ideal noise reduction, channel 2
HDU1 - IDNR-3 = ' 3.1623E+00' / ideal noise reduction, channel 3
HDU1 - RATNR-1 = ' 4.4855E-02' / realized/ideal noise reduction ratio, channel 1
HDU1 - RATNR-2 = ' 4.9789E-01' / realized/ideal noise reduction ratio, channel 2
HDU1 - RATNR-3 = ' 3.3905E-01' / realized/ideal noise reduction ratio, channel 3
HDU1 - MEDENR-1= ' 6.2124E-01' / effective median noise reduction, channel 1
HDU1 - MEDENR-2= ' 3.4736E+00' / effective median noise reduction, channel 2
HDU1 - MEDENR-3= ' 1.0298E+00' / effective median noise reduction, channel 3
HDU1 - REFENR-1= ' 6.1540E-01' / effective reference noise reduction, channel 1
HDU1 - REFENR-2= ' 3.5016E+00' / effective reference noise reduction, channel 2
HDU1 - REFENR-3= ' 1.0135E+00' / effective reference noise reduction, channel 3
HDU1 - NORMMODE= 'regular ' / normalization mode
HDU1 - NORMMETH= 'multiply-scale' / normalization method
HDU1 - NORMSCAL= 'BWMV ' / normalization scale/dispersion calculation
HDU1 - NORM-BGN= 'neutralize bg' / normalization background neutralization
HDU1 - NOTE-10 = 'REFERENC tag: used reference frame'
HDU1 - REFERENC= '_87A9843.CR3'
HDU1 - COMPMODE= 'full ' / composition mode
HDU1 - REGMODE = 'normal ' / registration mode
HDU1 - REGMODEL= 'projective' / registration model
HDU1 - OPT-DC = 'disabled' / optical distortion correction
HDU1 - WEIGHTS = 'equal ' / integration weights
HDU1 - INT-METH= 'average ' / integration method
HDU1 - OUTL-REJ= 'winsorized rejection' / outlier rejection filter
HDU1 - OUTL-DP = '6 ' / outlier rejection diffraction protection
HDU1 - OUTL-KL = 6.E0 / outlier rejection kappa low
HDU1 - OUTL-KH = 2.1E0 / outlier rejection kappa high
HDU1 - INT-MODE= 'Bayer/X-Trans drizzle' / integration mode
HDU1 - DRZ-DROP= 1.E0 / drizzle droplet size
HDU1 - DRZ-KERN= 'topHatKernel' / drizzle kernel
HDU1 - INTSCALE= 1.E0 / integrate scale
HDU1 - NOTE-11 = 'PROJECT tag: projection type'
HDU1 - PROJECT = 'rectilinearProjection'
HDU1 - MBBLEND = 'no MBB ' / multi-band blending
HDU1 - LNC-DEG = 'noLNC ' / Local Normalization Correction not applied
HDU1 - AD-PED = 0.E0 / adaptive pedestal from data calibration
HDU1 - END
The third test case changed the 6) INTEGRATE Tab INTEGRATE mode to drizzle. I selected No when warned I should be using Bayer/X-Trans drizzle, and forced APP to use regular drizzle. The result appeared to be normal to my eye. Again, I didn’t bother including that image as it was just a typical, light-polluted result that looked as expected.
So in summary, 1 form of drizzle seemed to work fine, but one did not.
Please let me know if I should upload any files (such as the .fits result).
Note that I sent an email to the support email address a few days back but have not seen a response. I'm guessing the forum is the preferred approach for these types of issues. If otherwise, just let me know.
Thanks.
Correspondence related to this issue was handled via support email.
The issue was quickly reproduced, and was very promptly addressed in the 2.0.0-beta17 release.
I re-tested using the same data set and confirmed that the red block artifacts were no longer present when using Bayer/X-Trans drizzle [on the 6) INTEGRATE Tab] with 'use camera color matrix' selected [on the 0) RAW/FITS Tab]. Put another way, to my eye, the issue I reported above has been resolved. In addition to testing with the default 'droplet size' and 'scale' settings, I also changed 'droplet size' and 'scale' and have not seen anything that raised concerns with the software.
I also tested the other 2 INTEGRATE modes [interpolation and drizzle] on the 6) INTEGRATE Tab with 'use camera color matrix' selected on the 0) RAW/FITS Tab, and saw nothing that raised any concerns with the software. This included various 'droplet size' and 'scale' settings.
Thanks very much for the prompt email responses, and the quick resolution.