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.
Hello,
I've been using APP for 2 years now without any issues. It's a fantastic stacking program!
However, I just recently started having problems with some of my frames failing star registration. The first instance was with my M51 data. I tried all the suggestions to no avail and then someone suggested checking the box "cosmic ray/noise reducer" and setting the lower limit area size to 10 and this worked. I didn't give it a second thought. Now it is happening to my M64 dataset as well, except this time the cosmic ray/noise reduction isn't working. I increased the #stars target from 500 to 1000 and the registration was successful, but the stacked image was terrible. Screenshot attached...
Any ideas as to the cause? I'm processing from my D drive and it has 278G of free space.
Thanks!
Larry
This is very strange. I was just about to write a similar post. Can you try using super pixel instead? Under tab zero. I was able to get this to generate reasonable results. The other thing I would like to add is that I also tried to stack through Pixinsight with similar results.
I’m using Nina, the latest 2.2 release. I also have a new QHY 268C. This just started to happen after I purchased the camera. But I’m wondering if there’s something going wrong with Nina? I’m dithering, and it almost looks like I get overlapping 2 images of the galaxy.
Kevin
Thanks Kevin! I'm going to try that right now. Strange that this just started happening... I did just notice this though. APP is installed on my C drive (250G SSD) that I just realized only has 18G of free space. I store my images on my D drive (1Tb with 275G free space). I'll have to do some cleaning up and report back.
I use APT for capture, so I doubt it has anything to do with NINA. My camera is Altair 26C and I've been using it for 2 years without issue.
Larry
Well Kevin, super pixel worked. It looked like an acceptable result. I've cleaned up my C drive and will try it again using Adaptive Airy Disc and see what happens.
Thanks for the tip!
Larry
Larry,
I’m glad that worked. But I would consider this a workaround and not a resolution. I don’t think your hard drive space has anything to do with what we’re both seeing. I think the registration process is part of the problem. I thought we might have a similar software or cameras… But no. I was getting registration errors also in Pixinsight. So that is the common link so far. I had 60 subs in my last nights work and registration failed after 32.
Anyone have any ideas?
OK. I freed up some disc space and ran that dataset through again at the default settings. Registration failed on about 8 frames so I deselected them and continued with the integration. Here's a screenshot of the result. Pretty much the same as the original. When using super pixel, I'm finding it hard to bring out any color at all...
Larry
I’m using a ZWO AM 5 for a mount. Using the beta firmware. Just checking if you are? It could be that we have separate issues. But my stacking looks just like yours. And I’ve been doing this for several years without any major issues like this.
Is there anything about the individual frames that look odd prior to stacking? I have the ZWO AM5 and have used it repeatably over the last week on a range of targets (in my case with the Zwo ASIAIR rather than NINA and a ZWO cam), Looking at the results, one thinks of cloud or dewing, and the telescope hitting the tripod, a loose or misbehaving guider.
when I looked through the sub frames, they look fine. So this is definitely not a cloud issue. If I notice one thing it’s that the galaxy seems to move more than I would expect. I’m wondering if the dither that is happening is too large. I dither on every second frame.
i’m going to create a new profile with her Nina. I think I’ve replaced both the camera and the mount in the previous profile which may be causing the problem.
I'm using an EQ6-R Pro, Altair 26C camera and APT for capture, so I don't think it's equipment related. Interesting that you are having registration problems in Pixinsight as well. I never bothered to learn WBPP since APP does such a great job and is fairly easy.
This problem started for me with my M51 dataset while I was using APP Beta 13 at that time. The issue arose again with my M64 dataset so I updated to Beta 17 to see if it would rectify the situation and it did not.
I would not suspect the dither distance to cause registration failures, but please let me know if you find that to be the case. My dither distance is set to 1 pixel (my SBIG guide camera has 7.6uM pixels) so I kind of hope that's not the case...
My individual subs look pretty good to me. I discard quite a few based on their score and I go through each one separately.
I haven't changed anything with my capture technique. This issue just popped up all of a sudden.
Larry
Interesting, if you have WBPP could you try it? Everything just set to default?
I'm stacking the data in DSS right now. I'll have to fool around with WBPP as I've never used it before.
Larry
I’m running the same data through beta 6 on an old computer. I’ve seen a few other post that look similar… preview bug is one.
So I woke up to beta six processing my results without any problems. Looks like this is something in the latest builds.
Could someone from APP let us know if they are aware of this issue and working on it? Perhaps they need some data or info from us?
Could someone from APP let us know if they are aware of this issue and working on it? Perhaps they need some data or info from us?
Agree.
What made you go all the way back to Beta 6? I'm about to install that and try it for myself.
Larry
I had APP beta 6 on a laptop in have nina installed. But I now have a desktop with more power to do all my processing. I just thought it would be a good test.
I had APP beta 6 on a laptop in have nina installed. But I now have a desktop with more power to do all my processing. I just thought it would be a good test.
I see... Well, I can confirm Beta 6 stacks all frames (at least it made it through registration with no failures). DSS stacked them as well, but gave the typical poor DSS result.
I'm hoping to not have to learn WBPP. I just paid for the owner's license of APP...
Larry
Beta 6 works for sure. Going to try a newer one. 10 maybe.
Larry
Beta 10 worked fine. Then I installed Beta 12 and registration failed. Running it on Beta 11 now.
Larry
OK. Beta 11 failed registration as well. I believe the problem lies between beta 10 and 11.
Larry
Doing some research, and found others that had similar issues. The link below suggest using cosmetic correction, in APP. I haven’t tried this yet. But they say hot pixels could be causing the problems with registration. I just got my QHY 268. Which is the same sensor as yours. And I’m not using darks any longer. So hot pixels might be the issue.
Something you might want to check out.
kevin
Doing some research, and found others that had similar issues. The link below suggest using cosmetic correction, in APP. I haven’t tried this yet. But they say hot pixels could be causing the problems with registration. I just got my QHY 268. Which is the same sensor as yours. And I’m not using darks any longer. So hot pixels might be the issue.
Something you might want to check out.
kevin
Thanks for that Kevin.
I was able to get my M51 data to stack by enabling cosmic ray detection with a low threshold of 10, but that didn't work on my M64 dataset. Maybe I'll try cosmetic correction.
Post back with your findings if you don't mind.
Larry
I'm also a little afraid of applying too much alterations during stacking and Pixinsight not behaving as expected as a result...
Larry
I know exactly what you mean about making too many changes. There’s lots of options here I know very little about. I just ran the original data through the latest beta 17 with cosmetic correction, and this seems like it fixes my stacking issues.
OK. I just confirmed with Beta 17 that applying cosmetic correction (all 3 checkboxes) allowed all of my frames to register. Disabling that and using the cosmic ray / noise reduction with a threshold of 8 caused many frames to fail registration. It looks like cosmetic correction is the way to go moving forward. Just as long as it doesn't caus any grief in post-processing.
Larry
Another test. I disabled cosmic ray / noise reduction and only checked the hot pixel kappa box in cosmetic correction and they registered just fine.
Larry
No registration errors and more importantly the stack doesn’t look like I spilled milk on my filter!
Great work guys. While as my image illustrates, I have not noticed any issues with my AM5 ZWO 533pro mc ASIAIR combination when using APP default 2.00 beta 13 (perhaps relevantly with temperature matched flats and biases applied) it is great to see there is a way forward if I experience this bizarre stacking issue as I possibly might it seems if this camera or another uncooled camera generates a higher level of hot pixels in the frames.
No registration errors and more importantly the stack doesn’t look like I spilled milk on my filter!
Absolutely! I just wish one of the moderators would have chimed in. I think I'm doing this right by just selecting hot pixel kappa in cosmetic correction...
Larry
