Stacking two stacks proportionately?

I considered this before with no easy workaround. With two stacks in average mode integration set to 'quality', I think the ratio is controlled by the quality score. But I could not use different star amount in the analyse stars tab to vary the quality score. 

When you stack the two stacks, what quality values appear in the log for each of them? It might be that the better detail, snr, starsize, or other parameters at slightly better pixel scale are prioritised proportionately in the final stack.... 

Thank you for the response. I'm not sure about the quality score at the moment, but will pay closer attention and play with stack options, although it sounds like you have tried that.  Photoshop wasn't working as well since I couldn't register the two accurately, even trying Registar.

Can APP output two sessions as seperate stacks (in one integration) registered to each other using one frame , in my case the CCD, as a reference? Also, I have seen talk of choosing the reference frame. How is that done extactly?

My end goal would be a full rez CCD output with an upsized, registered DSLR (since its a wider field) to fit it. If that is possible I could "stack the stacks" in APP and layer in more as desired in Photoshop.

Posted by: @maxtrixbass

Can APP output two sessions as seperate stacks (in one integration) registered to each other using one frame , in my case the CCD, as a reference? Also, I have seen talk of choosing the reference frame. How is that done extactly?

You can load the individual integration results as lights (do not load any calibration files!!!) and go to tab 4 to register them. APP will choose the best frame to register the other against. When done, click Save Registered Frames. 

Thank you for the info.

I think I have found a workable solution:

1. Stack the two sessions (via one integration) ,with their own calibration frames, and output each session, registered to the CCD subs, as separate stacks  (CCD and DSLR).

2. Do a stretch in APP matching them as closely as possible.

3. Output the two stretched files as both tif and fits. Stack the fits in APP with an "average" integration and multi band blending (10%) and no additional stretching. Save result as tif.

4. Load all 3 tifs into Photoshop. The "blended" becomes the base image. I can use the separated stacks to blend more of each source (most likely more of the CCD image...).

I could do it all in Photoshop once I have the registered session stacks, but APP blends far more seamlessly, so its nice to have APP involved as much as possible.

Posted by: @wvreeven

Posted by: @maxtrixbass

Can APP output two sessions as seperate stacks (in one integration) registered to each other using one frame , in my case the CCD, as a reference? Also, I have seen talk of choosing the reference frame. How is that done extactly?

You can load the individual integration results as lights (do not load any calibration files!!!) and go to tab 4 to register them. APP will choose the best frame to register the other against. When done, click Save Registered Frames. 

APP is currently choosing the frame I wish as reference. If it doesn't, how do I change it?

@maxtrixbass You can click on the file that you want to be reference in the file list and set it as reference. In general, APP will choose the file with the highest angular resolution as reference. 

Posted by: @wvreeven

@maxtrixbass You can click on the file that you want to be reference in the file list and set it as reference. In general, APP will choose the file with the highest angular resolution as reference. 

Many thanks for the info.

Related question, can anyone confirm is APP is smart enough to a stack of integrations proportionate to their total exposure time? Say I have one stack of 10x 300" frames, and one of 5x300" frames (after integration, APP knows that the resulting images have a total of  3000" and 1500" respectively and writes this to the FITS header). These should ideally be stacked so the 3000" has twice as much weight (assuming both have fairly equal FWHM/starcount/shape, whatever), but I'm not sure if this is actually how it works. Some clarification would be appreciated.

I don't think it does that no, it does however look at the quality of the stack when picking the reference for instance and then it'll likely be the integration with more data.If you stack data which is of less quality against it, it'll probably produce something a bit less in regards to noise, but possibly still have better signal.