UPDATE FROM MABULA
I have had a very rough 2 months unfortunately health wise. I was struck 3x in a row with bacterial infections. The second infection occurred after a routine hospital checkup and I became very sick. I had to rest and take a lot of antibiotics. Once I was recovering and restarting work 1 month ago, I again became sick. The infection was not yet gone, so even more antibiotics and rest was needed. Needless to say, it took a lot of my energy and I needed a lot of rest.
Finally, the infection is really gone and my energy is coming back step-by-step now and I have started work again. I am terribly sorry to have kept you waiting for support. I will address all outstanding questions and e-mails step-by step and will be on the forum daily from today.
APP 2.0.0-beta47 will come soon as well, a lot of work was already completed before I became very ill, so the release is also nearly ready for you. Beta47 will be much faster actually. Many workflows will be more than 2x faster, mosaics can even be 10x faster than before because registration really received a major boost... all compared to beta46. Before I release it, I will make sure that everything is working properly and then I will release it.
I have my 2 nights of 2 panes SHO data from 294MMPro dithering with bin2 (Image resolution 4144x2822).
I integrated each pane and then mosaic them together. And finishing with the Image resolution of 16000s x 20000s which much increase the file size.
Seems that the first normal integration of each pane double the resolution to 8200s x 5600s. And the mosaic integration double each pane resolution to 16000s x 11000s. As I did the mosaic at the long side the final image resolution becomes 16000s x 20000s. I always set the Integration mode to Interpolation.
My question is that what’s the difference between each integration mode and how it effect to the file size?
With dithering I want to get the benefit of eleminating walking noise. Is there an option to integrate by preserving the image resolution? Especially for mosaic, as the data already double pixel from each pane integration step.
Thank you in advance.
Hi Suwat @muangmuk,
Thank you very much for your question and clear description.
So the integration of your 4144x2822 images gives result sof 8200x5600, right? Then you probably are integrating with scale 2.0 in 6) integrate at the bottom? Maybe for (bayer/x-trans) drizzle ? That would explain that.
The mosaic then again has each pane double, where you probably still have set the scale to 2.0.
If you have scale set to 1.0, then the resulting pixel dimensions will be logical and comparable to the original pixel dimensions of your images.
Hope that explains it?
Mabula
@mabula-admin Thank you so much for your reply. I noticed that the Integration scale was set to 2.0 but the mode was set to Interpolation.
