Hi. I am new to deep sky imaging but come from a photography background. I currently use Lightroom, Photoshop and Deep Sky stacker but would like to know if buying a specialised program like Pixinsight is better for workflow and results compared to Photoshop etc. Any recommendations from experienced users would be great.
Considering your background, stick with Photoshop. For those of us with a significant photography background it is simply more intuitive. Pixinsight is a good tool, but more suited to scripting or programming backgrounds, in my opinion, and I did try it.
If all the programs you are using do the job then keep doing what you're doing. If you feel there are limitations in your workflow let us know then we can advise.
Peter,
What software do you use for image acquisition?
PS is handy to tweak the final images,, but you still need to control things like the camera,, filters, exposures, guiding etc etc.
I use Astroart which does all the above plus it has many processing features, stacking, flats, darks etc.
Recommended.
Peter,
What software do you use for image acquisition?
PS is handy to tweak the final images,, but you still need to control things like the camera,, filters, exposures, guiding etc etc.
I use Astroart which does all the above plus it has many processing features, stacking, flats, darks etc.
Recommended.
I am using a ZWOAir to control the camera and guiding etc and just work on the files in PS.
Photoshop was built for regular photography whereas Pixinsight was built for astro-photography. PS might seem more intuitive if that is what you are used to however PI has far more capability for astro-photography and it has all the parts you will ever need and more whereas the PS path will require a separate stacking solution and a bunch of add-ins.
I started with PS and purchased all the other bits along the way but have now moved to PI and that is all I use.
If your coming from PS or LR, I think you will find the UI of Pixinsight to be a bit 'different' Of course you can get used to anything, but each time I come back to using it from a bit of a break, I scratch my head wondering what the developers were smoking when they designed it. YMMV.
Astro pixel processor is also a nice alternative to Pixinsight.
You'll want to use the software that gives you the best results. Everyone has their favorites. And like anything using it is scary only if you're unfamiliar with it. When I first started using PI, I was totally confused by everything about it. Once I learned how to use it I couldn't think of using anything else. But that's me.
Some people use PI, some Star Tools or PS, still others use Affinity Photo or even GIMP.
As long as whatever software you use gives you the results you're looking for, go with that.
Of course you can get used to anything, but each time I come back to using it from a bit of a break, I scratch my head wondering what the developers were smoking when they designed it. YMMV.
