Stacking software

RobF (Rob) · #1 25-05-2009, 09:50 PM

I'd like to hear what people think about the quality of stacked images from payware programs (eg. ImagesPlus, Maxim DL, Pixinsight, etc) versus freeware (Deep Sky Stacker, IRIS). Obviously there is a heck of a lot of art and science to get the best out of the stacked image itself, but I'd like to know if people believe there is a handicap starting with freeware? I can handle a time penalty for using the freebies, but don't want to be losing valuable image detail.

Any specific examples of DSS versus some of the programs above might be interesting. So what do people think?

peter_4059 (Peter) · #2 25-05-2009, 10:04 PM

Rob,

I started out using DSS but have become a Nebulosity convert. I don't have any "data" to support my decision other than I found Nebulosity easier to use and it produced good results. I really like the Drizzle function.

DSS seemed to have a lot of options and it seemed to perform some weird on-screen stretch at the end?

Probably not what you are looking for but that's my opinion for what it's worth.

Peter

leinad (Dan) · #3 25-05-2009, 10:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by peter_4059

Rob,

I started out using DSS but have become a Nebulosity convert. I don't have any "data" to support my decision other than I found Nebulosity easier to use and it produced good results. I really like the Drizzle function.

DSS seemed to have a lot of options and it seemed to perform some weird on-screen stretch at the end?

Probably not what you are looking for but that my opinion for what it's worth.

Peter

I'm with Peter also.
After learning more about Nebulosity's processing techniques I've found it to be slightly better in some instances than DSS.

Unfortunately I don't have comparable data at present either.
As for Neb's unlicensed trial version:

Quote "All features are enabled when you download it, but saved images will be degraded (diagonal lines superimposed) until you purchase a license. Thus, you can evaluate the software extensively prior to purchase. "

jase (Jason) · #4 26-05-2009, 08:35 AM

I'd recommend trialling the software, both commercial and freeware. Even commercial software has its strengths and weaknesses. I often find I'm diving in and out of different applications as one will perform a specific task with more accuracy or provide the user with valuable feedback so you know what's going on. Which leads me to a key point, whatever software tool you choose, stick with it. Learn it inside out and know what it does to the data. I've seen people flame software on other forums because it didn't do the right job. 9/10 times, its the user's inexperience. Some tools are not as intuitive as others and take a while to pick up. It is all a part of the imaging learning curve. When trialling the software, don't solely focus on the stacking, but review the tools overall features to justify whether it worth.

At the opposite end of the scale, the only freeware software tool I've used is CCDSharp with is for deconvolution, not stacking. I presently utilise CCDStack and MaximDL for the grunt work such as stacking. I'm happy to discuss both of these in further depth.

Octane (Humayun) · #5 26-05-2009, 12:08 PM

IRIS is the way of the future.

It is a little tricky to get to grips with at first, especially if you're the type to click buttons rather than type commands. But, that's where its power lies: on the command line.

You could give DeepSkyStacker a go, which, if my understanding is correct, does pretty much the same thing that IRIS does, but, with an entirely graphical (point-and-click) front end.

Regards,
Humayun

tempestwizz (Brian) · #6 26-05-2009, 12:35 PM

Another vote for IRIS.
Agreed, there is a learning curve involved but it produces the results, moreso for DSLRs.
There are a number of tutorials available for free.

I have found CCDStack better suited for FITS raw files, but most, if not all the operations available in CCDStack are also in IRIS.

BC

RobF (Rob) · #7 27-05-2009, 07:13 PM

Thanks for the thoughts guys. I'll have to try a few of the demos you've mentioned. There are certainly some ideas in there I hadn't considered.

Bassnut (Fred) · #8 27-05-2009, 07:44 PM

Ive tried DL Maxim, IP and CCD stack (no free ones though).

IP is a no brainer for DSLRs IMO, it processes off disk. CCD stack and DL are nightmares with large DSLR image data, and especially lots of subs, they use RAM or disk cache.

I use CCD stack with my tiny mono subs because it gives the most control, and fits my RAM. DL has some cool automation features which makes the whole process painless. BUT would not recomend them for DSLRs.

I am amazed by IPs power and speed with my 40D subs, you pay for quality.

Im totally with Jase on the need to pick an app and stick with it, I earlier wasted huge amounts of time hoping between apps hopeing for the magic one-button fix, familiarity and expertise with one app is the best way. I hated CCD stack until I spent many hrs with it and got to know it.

h0ughy (David) · #9 27-05-2009, 10:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bassnut

Ive tried DL Maxim, IP and CCD stack (no free ones though).

IP is a no brainer for DSLRs IMO, it processes off disk. CCD stack and DL are nightmares with large DSLR image data, and especially lots of subs, they use RAM or disk cache.

I use CCD stack with my tiny mono subs because it gives the most control, and fits my RAM. DL has some cool automation features which makes the whole process painless. BUT would not recomend them for DSLRs.

I am amazed by IPs power and speed with my 40D subs, you pay for quality.

Im totally with Jase on the need to pick an app and stick with it, I earlier wasted huge amounts of time hoping between apps hopeing for the magic one-button fix, familiarity and expertise with one app is the best way. I hated CCD stack until I spent many hrs with it and got to know it.

LOL so you do touch a DSLR camera Fred

. In your opinion how did you rate IP for processing, do you know much about PixInsight?

Bassnut (Fred) · #10 27-05-2009, 10:26 PM

yes David, now that my St10 is crook, Ive reverted to the 40D and IP for a bit of fun (nothing worth posting yet unforch). IP is totally tuned to DSLRs, it just rocks. In fact I recon the CCD guys could learn a few things off Mike Unsold on processing proceedures, its just soooo smooth and intuative.

I havent used PixInsight, know nothing about it.

tlgerdes (Trevor) · #11 28-05-2009, 06:21 AM

Hi Fred,

When talking about IP are you referring to MaximDL IP or some other product called IP. If something else can you please tell me the name of the manufacturer?

Alchemy (Clive) · #12 28-05-2009, 06:34 AM

IP = Images Plus manufacturer Mike Unsold