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.
General
1
Posts
1
Users
0
Reactions
1,700
Views
Topic starter
June 25, 2020 12:30
I have noticed that when I have my image just the way I want it in .fits, and save it that the .jpg or .tif image doesn't look the same, but it isn't consistent. Sometimes the jpg is much brighter as if it has been stretched again, and sometimes it is darker.
Don't laugh at this image of M42, this was one of my first ever and before I understood the value of taking Dark's Flats and Dark Flats, so no calibration at all. Actually the final stack is hideously covered with artifacts.
First is the .fits, then .jpg
 I had to overstretch the .fits to maintain some of the greys and blues.
I have tried both tif and jpg with similar results and all the different methods of saving.
Â
Thoughts?
