16 November 2020 - Wouter van Reeven has officially joined the Astro Pixel Processor Team as a moderator on our forum, welcome Wouter 🙂 !
30 July 2020 - APP 1.083-beta1 has been released introducing Comet processing! This 1st beta has comet registration. The stable release will also include special comet integration modes.
9 July 2020 - New and updated video tutorial using APP 1.081: Complete LRGB Tutorial of NGC292, The Small Magellanic Cloud by Christian Sasse (iTelescope.net) and Mabula Haverkamp
2019 September: Astro Pixel Processor and iTelescope.net celebrate a new Partnership!
Duo-band (L-enhance) and drizzle
I have captured images of NGC6960 (Western veil) on a Canon 700D with L-enhance duoband. I then integrate with HA-extract and OIII extract and rebuild an HOO image in Combine RGB and it looks good. When I look at the HA and OIII they are very different which is all good.
BUT - if i try to integrate the same data with Ha-extract and OIII extract and drizzle in the integration, the HA and OIII mono images look identical. and of course the combined HOO image is no good.
Am I missing some tweak in settings?
Interesting, it might be a bug perhaps. I’ll inform Mabula about and thank you for notifying us. If it’s something else, we’ll find it out.
I'm experiencing the same thing, i.e. identical (and not very good) Ha and OIII results when I use Bayer/X-Trans drizzle. As an experiment, I tried regular drizzle and said No when it asked be to switch to Bayer/X-Trans. That gave similar (good) results to regular interpolation.
Are you willing to share your data for me to have a closer look?
Go to https://upload.astropixelprocessor.com and use upload1 (or upload2 till 5) as username and password will then be the same as the username.
Create a directory named “neverfox-drizzle” and upload in there. Thank you!
Thanks, I'll download the data shortly and have a play with it.
So I'm trying the bayer drizzle integration, I do see differences between the OIII and Ha, mainly in signal. But that's to be expected as the OIII signal is much lower, so in the end result is difficult to notice. There is a difference though with the regular integration, so it's something I'll try to investigate further.
If there are differences, they aren't readily visible in the way you'd expect though. When I load one and then the other in APP preview, you can't tell that you actually changed the image. That's not what you get if you don't use drizzle. Instead you get a strong Ha and weak OIII with noticeable differences in where the nebulosity has signal. Happy to provide the integrated files so you can see if I'm seeing what you're seeing.
Mm, yes that would be nice, I can forward those to Mabula with some of the explanation. Could you upload those in the same folder on the server? I couldn't see it very well which made it hard to make conclusions, the OIII was too weak for that in my processing.
@mackiedlm Isn't it so that when using bayer drizzle or x-trans the bayer CFA settings under tab 0) gets ignored?
Same experience here. When trying to use Bayer drizzle the two files using the 'Ha-OIII extract Ha' and 'Ha-OIII extract OIII' algorithms are poor quality and look almost identical. Using interpolation mode is fine with 'OK' results but I wanted to try drizzle as images are dithered and undersampled. Any update on what the issue might be on this ? thanks!
I've asked Mabula to have a look as I'm not super familiar with this particular workflow.
This never worked for me for the past 2 years now.
Ok, very late update on this. Indeed, combined with drizzling we now see there is a bug! Sorry for not noticing this clearly, we haven't done this workflow much and I couldn't see it properly. It will be fixed in the next release!
I have no real date myself, but it should be very shortly. I think within a week or 1-2.