Quote:
Originally Posted by RickS
Are you sure that you're using the files that were output by the StarAlignment process? I just helped someone on the PI Forum with the same issue. It turned out that the registered files were going to a different folder from the one he expected.
I've never heard of StarAlignment failing to register images without displaying error messages. It would be worth checking through the process console log carefully. Another thing you could try is opening a few of the files and applying StarAlignment to them as views and watch what happens.
Cheers,
Rick.
|
Thanks for the suggestions Rick.
The files produced by the alignment process have the '_r' appendix on them and I've pointed the integration tool to those files so am confident that that is not the source of my problem.
I had a look back over some previous projects and viewed the registered files (that I had saved). There seemed to be some variance with how these files were processed, in that for some projects, the registered files didn't look to be modified, whereas in other projects, the registered files had obviously been translated (eg. rotated slightly) ready for the integration tool to superimpose them. I integrated one set of registered files and that worked just fine.
I have noticed that the star alignment tool is layed out a little differently to how it was a few years ago when I first started, and also has a few different check boxes, so I am wondering if I've got those all set appropriately.
The other thing I noticed, which is probably highly relevant, is in relation to what the process console displays for each file (I had 60 in this batch). Because I didn't use any guiding (just tracking), there is a degree of drift, and this target was close to the celestial equator so the drift was noticeable across the hour or so during which the images were exposed (60 x 1 min subs). Therefore (and as in the past), I would have expected to see the translation matrices with progressively more and more offsets (ie. higher pixel adjustments) relative to the reference image - which I selected to be the first one that I took in the whole sequence. If I recall correctly, it would not be uncommon to see the pixel adjustment increase by say a few tens of pixels for each exposure. This was especially so when I did in-camera darks, but I didn't do that on this occasion.
I've just run the star alignment tool again, but to speed up the process I selected every 10th image. I've copied the process console workings to a Word file for easier viewing, and could send that to you Rick if you felt inclined to have a closer look. From the workings, there seems to be some erratic variations in pixel offsets. It is as though the reference file isn't being referred to properly, although I did include the reference file in the target image list, and it came through the process with a 'clean bill of health' - ie. no adjustments whatsoever, which is exactly as it should be.
I have also just tried opening two of the files as views - and that made no difference either. The new file was identical to the original RAW file. For this test I selected the reference image to be the first of the batch of 60 that I took, and the file to be aligned was the last of the 60 (ie. I was looking for maximum effect).
So, something is not right and I'm at a bit of a loss as to what to try next.
Cheers, Chris