June 24 2026 APP 2.0.0-beta46 has been released !
Improved internal memory configuration (lower ! memory usage), fixed beta45 startup issue, fixed Set Save Directory & 2-panel mosaics.
May 27 2026 APP 2.0.0-beta45 has been released !
Fully Multi-Threaded LNC, many improvements for the registration engine, platform upgrade, and further tuning of internal memory consumption and memory release back to OS.
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.
Hi,
I have a question about combining images taken by 2 different camera/telescope setups.
Which of both scenarios below, will give the best result in APP, or are there other constraints on the camera/telescope combination:
Scenario 1)
Two different camera/telescope setups which provide images with same FOV, but different resolution (pixelscale in arcsec/pixel)
eg: 2 different telescopes (different focal lengths) and 2 different cameras (different sensor size, different pixel size, a 16MP and 26MP camera), but such that 2 setups provide images with a nearly identical field of view, but with different pixelscale (arcsec/pixel).
This would mean that APP should do a lot of pixel interpolations.
or
Scenario 2)
Two different camera/telescope setups which provide images with same resolution (pixelscale in arcsec/pixel), but different FOV.
This means the FOV is the smallest of both FOVs, and the edges are cut off.
Which of above scenarios will lead to the best results in APP? Or are there any other constraints to make it work?
Thanks for your support.
Regards,
Steven
I think if resolution is what you want to retain, having similar resolutions results in a “better” image. Different FOV is no problem for APP, we’ve been testing the software with images from forum users and combining all those setups. Personally, I like to have the most signal, instead of the best resolution and that will depend more on the more sensitive setup.
@vincent-mod
Hi Vincent,
Thanks a lot for your feedback. First part of your answer is cristal clear!
But what do you exactly mean with preferring "the most signal, instead of the best resolution"? DO you mean that you don't care much about resolution and that you aim for identical FoV such that both series are overlapping and adding signal over the full image? Scenario 1 requires APP to interpolate a lot combining different pixelscale images with identical FoV, eg 16MP combing with 26MP and still the same FoV. Can APP deal with that?
So technically scenario 2 is the best "quality" solution (details, resolution) and works fine with APP.
But you would prefer scenario 1 to maximize signal. Right?
Kind regards,
Steven
Yes, APP can deal with that. What I mean is that the setup giving you the best signal over noise ratio, would be my choice to combine with. That will depend on the sensor, the F ratio of the scope, etc. Say you have a scope with high resolution sensor, but the entire sensitivity of the setup isn’t great, it wouldn’t produce a better result when imaging a nebula for instance. A low resolution, but with a very sensitive setup, would. An overlapping FOV is a nice second requirement to have as you wouldn’t need to crop the image a lot.
For galaxies, higher resolution would be very nice. So it depends a bit on the object. But personally I prefer the best signal.
