Mar 28 2026 APP 2.0.0-beta40 will be released in 7 days.
It did take a long time to have the work finished on this and it will have a major performance boost of 30-50% over 2.0.0-beta39 from calibration to integration. We extensively optimized many critical parts of APP. All has been tested to guarantee correct optimizations. Drizzle and image resampling is much faster for instance, those modules have been completely rewritten. Much less memory usage. LNC 2.0 will be released which works much better and faster than LNC in it's current state. And more, all will be added to the release notes in the coming weeks...
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.
I stacked using the new algorithm and compared it to the old Dualband extraction. Ha is the same, but the Oiii.extraction gives med a lower signal strength. Why is that?
Hi Stefan,
Thank you very much for your question.
What exactly do you mean with "med a lower signal strength"? I am not quite sure what values you are comparing here, do you mean the sky background value as analysed as shown in the graph?
If so: the sky background level in any integration is determined by the reference sky background in combination with the normalization settings in 5) normalize. It could very well be that the reference in beta39 is chosen differently when compared to beta38. That would explain it. In beta39 there is an improvement in the automatically chosen reference frame.
Let me know if this explains it for you.
It is always better to comparte the Signal to Noise ratios between the images. They should not deviate more than 5%, because the noise calculation has a little error margin. Can you check that?
Mabula
I stacked using "Multi-NB extract H-a + Oiii) and I also stacked using "Multiband-NB extract Oiii".Â
I then uploaded the stacks to APP to compare the data. The Oiii S/N ratio is higher for the latter.
Okay, that is fine, what difference do you see in the S/N then? It will never be exactly the same for sure. When you process Multi-NB extract H-a + OIII, the Multi-NB color (which is Ha + O3 basically) is used for normalization, basiscally the green and blue channel is normalized and then from the green and blue layers in the integration the O3 is extracted, so the process is slighly different when comparing the just processing extract O3 where immediately O3 is extracted from each light, that monochrome layer is then uses as reference normalization level.
The key here is that there will be always a slight difference between the 2 but they should look the same for your eye definitely. It is a bit technical, but noise levels are correlated with dispersion (or vice versa) and the noise calculation is very robust but it is not exact, it has an error margin. I will try to explain this in the manual is well in the chapter for normalization.
When i was implementing the new Multi-NB algorithms is also noticed this slight difference between SNR, but I also saw that the same ddp auto stretch gave exactly the same visual as result on both workflows. I saw SNR difference of only 1-4 % difference I think which is within the error margins and is not something you would see.
This this make sense relating to what you are seeing?
Mabula
