DMK headache

[matt]

Calling all DMK owners.

Can anyone tell me why Registax3 will not open the AVIs I'm creating with my DMK21AF04.

Every time I select an AVI to open - even a short one - I keep getting this error message:

Failed to start AVI decompression.

I'm using the Y800 uncompressed codec, so why would the AVI require decompression:shrug:

Please help

[Dennis]

Hi Matt

Is there a DMK option NOT to record audio? I recall, a long, long time ago with my ToUcam that if audio was selected, I got the same error message?

Cheers

Dennis

[matt]

I'll check it out, Dennis.

But I suspect that with the DMK differs from the ToUcam in that it wasn't designed originally as a webcam?? I also don't think it has a mic??

I just recorded an AVI and again failed to open in Regi3...but Regi4 had no trouble. Alas, I'm not a big fan of Regi4

Maybe it's the version of Registax 3 I'm using???

I want to keep using R3, but maybe my version doesn't support the AVI format?

[rsbfoto]

Why do you make yourself life complicated. Go and Download Registax v4

[iceman]

Rainer is right. Get registax 4. It works on DMK avi's without needing conversion.

Plus, registax 4 is tonnes better than R3 anyway. You all should be using it by now :)

[matt]

Gee.

Wasn't expecting that!:lol:

What if one simply has a preference for R3 or finds it a little more user friendly???

It's not about wanting to make life harder for myself. It's about sticking with what works for me.

I've tried R4 and for some reason am struggling to make it work for me. Others are in the same boat.

Thanks

[iceman]

I find the user-interface almost identical?
What problems are you having with R4? I think we should work on those issues first ;)

If you really want to persist with old and outdated software :P then you will need to convert your DMK avi's - either into BMP's or save as another avi (both using virtualdub).

That's what I had to do before R4 came out.

[matt]

For starters, I can't get the hang of multi point alignment.

My planetary images end up looking like a Picasso! I get a different processing result in each square at the end of the process and it all looks as though it's been assembled by a madman:lol:

I also find (when I use single point alignment) I can only get one optimising run, unlike R3 when the software used to go through a number of runs before you went to wavelets.

[iceman]

Probably should start a new thread with this and post some screenshots of the settings/options you use which will help troubleshoot.

In general, always use a feather (I use 10px).


That's an option on the "Optimise" Tab. Unclick "Single Run Optimizer".

[matt]

RE: the Optimizer unclick.

Seem to recall doing that and still only ended up with a single run.:)

[iceman]

It may sometimes still only do a single run if it can't find enough difference to do another run. I do note that R4 can sometimes do less runs than R3.
My guess is that the optimise algorithm is better, meaning it can get it more right after the first pass and sometimes won't need more.

[matt]

OK.

Will give R4 another try.

I also find it a little different in terms of accessing its various user-controlled features.

I'll go off and print up the user manual and see what I can see;)

[matt]

Rainer - just so you know, I've only had my new DMK about three days.

So I'm going through the same questions and confusions as many people who began this journey months ago.

Forums are great. It's where you get to ask questions and nice people often answer your questions, without making you feel like an idiot:)

Sorry if some questions are irritating to you. Perhaps you could ignore them until we catch up to you.

[rsbfoto]

OK, OK, sorry for that advice. Just do not download v4 and keep using to v3.

Sorry again. Was just a stupid idea from my side.

There is a dedicated Yahoo group for discussing RegiStax, maybe there somebody can give you any tips.

http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/RegiStax/

Ialso have DMK cameras and I can process all my files in v4 without any problem, but OK nobody can force you to use v4 which is by far better then v3. OK, just my very personal opinion.

Again, Apologies for my first post about making yourself your life easy.

[rsbfoto]

Seems to be that the irritated one are you.

It was just a well meant comment.

Could it be that you are somehow frustrted because nothing works and that is why you read other peoples posts in a manner that you find every word as an attack to your person ?

Also please do not forget that as you live in Australia and I live in Mexico and my mother tongue os not english maybe my way of writing things sound different ?

OK, Again apologies, apologies and apologies. Will not happen again that I give you a simple advice because my english writing is misunderstood.

Do what ever you want.

[rsbfoto]

[quote=matt;200935]For starters, I can't get the hang of multi point alignment.

My planetary images end up looking like a Picasso! I get a different processing result in each square at the end of the process and it all looks as though it's been assembled by a madman:lol:

....quote]

Multipoint alignment for planetary imaging is not a good solution. I have done that too and they look like you said.

By the way that is a problem that has absolutely nothing to do with v4 and AVI decompression.

If you mix up your problems yourself then of course nobody can help you.

One thing is the problem of decompressing AVI's and the other thing is that multipoint alignment used for planets makes the images look like picasso.

[matt]

Er... OK... thanks.

Wow!!

I wasn't taking your comments as an attack. I don't want to get into a fight with you.

It might have just been best if someone simply said V3 doesn't handle the AVIs which come out of the DMK.

Simple and to the point. I didn't want to get into a whole V3 Vs V4 fight.

Anyway. Many thanks.

[matt]

OK. Was all a little lingo misunderstanding.

Rainer has kindly communicated with me via pm and we're all sorted.

As he said, it's easy to get the wrong meaning when you're in a forum and speak different languages as our native tongue.

Thanks for the invite to join the DMK Yahoo group, Rainer. I'll catch up with you there:)

Apologies for seeming so stubborn on the V3/V4 issue. I have tried to use V4, but have had a few problems with it.

I am sure these are my own problems of understanding, which I will need to overcome since I want to process my Y800 DMK AVIs in Registax, but will need to figure V4 out to do that.

I'm being a bit stubborn holding on to V3...while moving on with my camera choice of DMK. So it's like 2 worlds colliding:lol:

Sometimes we are creatures of habit, but that's no excuse.

I've printed the V4 instructions up and will make it my "mission" to get that working for me.

Thanks folks.

[gbeal]

Matt,
I too struggled with the DMK, for a short time, until I worked out the correct codec etc. Hang in there, it WILL get easier, and once it does it will seem like the storm in a teacup it was.
If it makes you feel any better, I am using R4, but only cos I will look a sissy if I persevere with R3. It isn't as easy as R3, but then again I recall the same thoughts with R2/R3.
Good to see you guys are back on track, we can all use the expert input.

[matt]

No worries Gaz.

Sort of had a chicken and egg thing going there for a while.

Like: What's going on with V3 not opening Y800 uncompressed DMK AVIs?-why are you using V3?-coz i like V3-but V4 is better and handles the AVI straight out of the camera-but I haven't made the switch to V4 blah blah blah.

It was all going backwards and forwards but not really addressing the original post which I thought asked a simple and direct question. Perhaps I didn't make myself clear?

I had no idea V3 couldn't work with the Y800 codec uncompressed format:shrug: Now I know.

Just one of those communication thingos:lol:

But out of curiosity, what would be the best codec to work with if (heaven forbid) I choose to continue using V3?

Or am i limiting the camera's potential by resorting to a compressed format?

Thanks guys.

[iceman]

I use Y800, almost everyone I know with a DMK uses Y800.

The only option is to re-save the AVI or convert it to BMP's.

I think some people have used the Lead mpeg codec, but I don't know enough about it to say anymore than that.

[matt]

Thanks Mike.

You'll be pleased to know I'm already reading the V4 User Manual at work.

During my lunch hour, of course:lol:

I guess the other reason why I've kind of stuck with V3 is the numerous comments I've read that it doesn't really offer much improvement/benefit for us planetary imagers?

I forget what reasons were given, but they sounded convincing at the time:P

[DobDobDob]

Not wanting to rain on your parade.....but.....your first post was at 12.34 pm and this one is 1.49 pm, so I was just wondering how much longer you are going to have for lunch and what job you do and do you want a partner :P

[matt]

:lol: You got me there.

I was sneaking a few sly posts in before lunch...and now I'm openly reading the R4 manual at my desk.

I'm telling my colleagues it's a new sponsor agreement I'm looking over, before we pitch it to a prospective client;)

Would you believe me if I told you I'm in media/marketing/PR???

[iceman]

I don't agree with that. It depends whether you think R4 is just R3 with MAP. R4 has many other improvements and bug fixes over R3 which makes it a better choice, regardless of whether you do single or multi-point alignment.

Regarding MAP on planetary images, it really depends on your seeing and image scale. For small images that can be encompassed in a 128px box, then single alignment point would be ok.

But for long focal length, large image scale imaging, I use 2 or 3 alignment points across the image and I have seen first hand that the resulting MAP image is sharper across the object than a single alignment point.

[matt]

Thanks Mike.

Looking forward to getting stuck in to V4 and seeing the difference for myself.

To my way of thinking, even if it's only a 5-10% improvement, that's of value:thumbsup:

[gbeal]

Matt,
IIRC I was using R3, and Y800 when I had mine, but don't quote me on that.
I still side with Mike here, get to R4, and beat it, rather than going back in time.

[matt]

What are you saying, Gaz!!!!!!!!

Just when I'm all set to say goodbye to V3 forever:rofl: :rofl:

[Astroman]

I think once you start fiddling more with R4 the more you will find how well it does, some things its only a subtle improvement on others it does a fantastic job. When R4 first came out we were a little skeptical on how the multi mapping would go on planets, like Jupiter and Saturn, I guess if seeing conditions permit it, it will do a great job, then again, maybe only one single point is needed. Keep playing with it, it will eventually grow.

[matt]

Reckon you're right, Andrew.

Gonna get stuck into it and see how it goes. Can't do any harm to have a dip:thumbsup: