File list sorting

@heno I have passed on these requests to Mabula as well.

The sorting requirements are different between users, I guess. Obviously the reason for above requirement is splitting one session into 3-4 e.g. to work around hardware limitations. 

If You have real different sessions (e.g. 1 session Luminance, one RGB), the current sorting is perfectly user-friendly, because You want to discard the worst Lum frames & the worst RGB frames in each session, not a random batch of frames regardless what session they belong to.

A potential solution might be to sort not by number of session first but by type of session (Lum, RGB, UHC, Ha, O3, S2 etc) and allow the user to create multiple session numbers using the same type (e.g. Lum 1, Lum 2,....).

This would cover requirements for all users (would sort by type - like I require, but keeps all frames of the same type in one batch-like Heno requires, regardless of session number).

It might require introducing a few more session type selectors  (e.g. more filter types like duoband) for more clarity.

Clear skies, Jochen

Posted by: @heno

1. Usually when I stack images I have more than one session, 3-4 is quite normal. However, no matter what sort order I choose, the result is always first sorted by session. If I want to exclude the worst files I have to go through the list session by session, not very user friendly. I have not found a way to avoid this. Can this be fixed?

2. Can we please have FWHM included a a sort criterium?

3. When files are excluded from integration it would have bee nice to be able to flag these (for later deletion or whatever). As it is today we have to manually flag/delete the files before integration or the record of excluded files is lost.

These suggestions are closely related to this post:
https://www.astropixelprocessor.com/community/rfcs-request-for-changes/integration-filters/#post-15128

Helge

 

@heno, It is in our todo list, but it needs to wait until we have released APP 2.0.0 stable. We need to prioritize on solving several issues on Windows 11 and macOS Ventura first so we can finally release 2.0.0 stable with a manual as well.

FWHM selection is part of star shape sorting 😉 but we will make FWHM or star size also possible.

Mabula

@mabula

Thanks for your answer. I'm OK with that. 🙂 

@jochen-scharmann 

I was not aware that anybody used sessions in this manner. My understanding of its intended use is that you group the images collected in one night in one session. But of cause if you collect only images from one filter in one night, you're right. I never do that. But that is a matter of choice I suppose.
I'm not sure if there is much to gain (except for organising the files) from using sessions if all the images in one session is stacked together anyway, but I may be wrong.

Posted by: @heno

@jochen-scharmann 

I was not aware that anybody used sessions in this manner. My understanding of its intended use is that you group the images collected in one night in one session. But of cause if you collect only images from one filter in one night, you're right. I never do that. But that is a matter of choice I suppose.
I'm not sure if there is much to gain (except for organising the files) from using sessions if all the images in one session is stacked together anyway, but I may be wrong.

@heno, using multiple sessions would only be needed technically if you have different calibration frames per session, like flat frames. Otherwise, it is completely safe to process many nights of data into 1 session.

Hi @Heno ,

Yes there is. Living in a suburban area I need to use use Light Pullution filters for Luminance this keeps shot noise down a bit. That will be my session 1, Luminance.

To achieve true star colors, I shoot lights using UV/IR filter only, which will be my session 2, RGB. Both stacks will be registered against the same light, normalized and worst frames of each stack sorted out (usually just a few, I leave most of it to APP's "weight on quality" setting in tab 6). 

In my post prod software (StarTools), I load session 1 as luminance and session 2 stack as RGB (for color). That gives me minimal noise, best contrast and true colors

Just recently I have added a 3rd session (narrowband stack) in an narrowband slot to enhance Ha regions

... and yes, as Mabula mentioned I use different flats &darks, since usually both sessions will be shot in different nights, with different temperatures using different filters and different dust donuts 

@jochen-scharmann @mabula

Hi.
I realize that I may have used sessions more than I actually needed. I'm fortunate enough to have a permanent setup, I avoid changing camera angle and rarely need to take new flats. However, a lot (most?) people do need to take new calibration frames every night for various reasons. When I had a RASA I did the same as you, one filter for a whole or even several nights.  A filter wheel was not possible. I still put each night's result in different sessions because I thought I had to, not so much for the calibration, but for the use of LNC. That was probably a misunderstanding as well.
I can see why you find it useful to sort by session, and my request is not to take this away, but to make it optional like all the other sort criteria. But for all those that use a filter wheel imaging through several filters over several nights this mandatory session sort is a pain as I described initially in my change request.
If/when Mabula provides a filter solution to eliminate the worst frames, the sorting will become less important.
I hope this make sense. 🙂