Quote:
Originally Posted by Stonius
I often find no difference between 50 & 10%, but a marked improvement with 5%, or even 2%.
|
yep, if you use the image as is from AS! it's hard to pick a difference. but if you further process the differences both good (signal) and bad (noise) will be made more obvious. 2% should be noticeable as you are only stacking the few very best quality frames. I'd advise to use a % that gives you at least 100 frames to combine however so at least noise is well suppressed as are any possible blocks present in your source file from the file type and/or any compression present. That will at least give you a file you can adjust contrast and saturation a bit on to taste.
everybody captures different durations so advice on percentage isn't appropriate but i think aiming for a minimum of 100 frames in the stack is a good guide. just my opinion, i havent tested but please feel free to disagree.
part of my process is to run my planetary SER captures through PIPP first to crop to about 400x400 pixels centering the planet and exporting to SER about 2,000-5,000 frames (my captures often are above 10k+ frames) and ordered by quality. My thinking here is since i am using an AltAz rig with dubious tracking the planet drifts in my source captures and likely rolls too slightly. So centering in pipp makes up for bad or no tracking. order by quality should kill off the really bad frames. now the output file i drop into autostakkerthas the frames well aligned making it easier for AS! to fine tune with its alignment and its quality method on top should be using the most perfect frames to work with. So hopefully it makes less errors with picking alignment points and gives me the very very best result possible with my source capture. Until AS4! comes along which blows our minds.