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.
Forgive me if this was answered before, I did do some searching but couldn't locate a answer.
QHY600mm and trying to see why Flats are causing poor normalization. With a 6200mm, same process and works great. Using NINA to save as .fits files.
Bias with 10% stretch. .001 second images.
Dark with 10% stretch. 60 second images.
Flat red filter with no stretch on it. sky flat and flat panel both same results. this is .5 second images with 30% histogram when taken.
Â
Raw image with 15% stretch and dark skies with very little vignetting.
Normalized image with 15% stretch and flats applied. Vignetting worse.
Â
If we remove the flats and just use MB, MD, BPM, they look good, but we need flats to work due to dust sections. Am I doing something bad here?
Â
As a follow up, we tried more aggressive flats, upwards of 60-70%. It's not clipping the flats anywhere.
Â
aggressive flats with 65% histogram range.
Â
Raw subs look pretty good without flats applied, dark skies help.
Â
but after applying flats, we get this.
Â
Any further data I am happy to provide. I'm thinking this really should be minor variation between the RAW and normalized with dust removed using the flats.
Hi Josh @jjones,
Thank you very much for posting your question. Please accept my aplogies for not replying sooner.
Did you find an explanation in the meantime for the bad flat-field correction or is this still unanswered? If unanswered, did you check that the MasterDark and MasterBias are compatible with both the lights and the flats in terms of sensor gain and offset? How about temperature and exposure time?
If you need me to look at your data, please let me know and I will provide upload instructions.
Mabula
Â
I honestly could never get it to work with this specific set of gain/offset on the camera. It's a QHY at gain 26 and we eventually opted to move it down to gain 25 and retake some and the worked much better. Not sure if it was camera Mode change or what. I think we are good now moving forward, appreciate the follow up.
Hi Josh @jjones,
Okay, you are most welcome, it sounds a bit like something was off in terms of compatibility between the lights, flats and the other calibration frames. If you do have more issues, let me know and I can look at the data for you 😉Â
Mabula
