19 June 2021: Our upload server https://upload.astropixelprocessor.com/ has been migrated successfully to our new office with higher upload and download speeds (nearly 10MByte/sec up/down ) ! We now have 1 general upload user called: upload with password: upload. The users upload1 - upload5 have been disabled.
31 May 2021: APP 1.083-beta2 has been released ! APP 1.083 stable will follow soon afterwards. It includes a completely new Star Reducer Tool, New File Saver Module, Improved Comet registration and much more, check the release notes here!
After calibrating and normalizing a stack of subs, I opened one of the subs and the "l-c-r-normalised" view. I'm not sure what I'm supposed to see (haven't been using APP for long) but was surprised by the bands of different colours running across the image. Can someone confirm if this is expected? I didn't see any trace of these bands in the final integration (also attached).
I'm having trouble seeing the first picture, could you try uploading it once more?
I just updated the original post. Thanks!
Thank you! Ok, so that doesn't look familiar to me. It should be the linear, calibrated, registered and normalised mode. I guess you had all calibration files etc. loaded?
I had a MasterBias, MasterDark and BPM loaded. I think I've narrowed things down. If I select HaOIII-Color for the algorithm at Step 0 and Bayer/XTrans Drizzle for the integration mode in Step 6, I get stripes on the normalized data...
But selecting HaOIII-Color at Step 0 and Interpolation for the integration mode in Step 6, everything looks OK...
Ah, thanks for testing that. That might be an issue and I'll forward that to Mabula.
edit: Just had a discussion and this is in fact normal. It may not be super informative, but it shows the drizzling in effect per frame basically. The fact that some regions have less data is exactly why drizzling also causes a bit more noise. That's how the algorithm works and you'll get different patterns when you change the droplet size for instance. I don't use it often and never really tried this view in particular, which is why I didn't recognize it. 🙂
Thanks so much for looking into this. Good to know that this is expected behaviour.