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. Â Before I release it, I will make sure that everything is working properly and then I will release it.
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
