What is the best autoguiding software

[gregbradley]

Do you think some software does a better job of autoguiding than others?

Any opinions?

PHD, CCDsoft, Maxim DL.

I know CCDOps has some adapter algorithim but I only used it once very early on so I don't know. I see good results from PHD and it is very simple.

I currently use CCDsoft and the Temma driver by Chuck Faranda which is quite user friendly and enables adjustment of the guide rates as it is going along so you can fine tune it to an extent, plus you can park the Tak mount so it is still aligned next use. I have had troubles in the past using CCDsoft and an FSQ106ED. For some reason it wouldn't callibrate the autoguider with that setup. I had to use subframes as it was reading hot pixels by mistake.

I used PHD once with a Starfish autguiding camera and that was very user friendly - just plug and play pretty much.

Greg.

[Moon (James)]

What mount and camera are we talking about here?
Do you want to be able to dither between your exposures?

Which ever way you slice it, my vote is for MaximDL.
James

[jase (Jason)]

Originally Posted by gregbradley

I have had troubles in the past using CCDsoft and an FSQ106ED. For some reason it wouldn't callibrate the autoguider with that setup. I had to use subframes as it was reading hot pixels by mistake.

Bias/Dark subtract your guider images will solve pixel anomaly concerns. Also keep in mind that wide field guider setups need a longer calibration time. i.e. it takes longer for the guide star to move and determine the X and Y directions (orientation of guide chip). When I was guiding on axis with the FSQ and STL11k (internal guide chip), I calibrated both X and Y based on 20sec elapse times. This gave a strong reading between the X and Y axis providing the typical "L" shape. Longer focal lengths, the time can be reduced.

Originally Posted by Moon

Which ever way you slice it, my vote is for MaximDL.
James

DITTO!

Feature rich guiding tools;
Can tweak aggressiveness (on the fly if desired), min and max movements, dithering, calibration frame reduction, sub frame grabs, scope declination compensation, binning, manual calibration, X/Y correction logging and graphing (in telescope or camera axis, with RMS). MaximDL remains the data acquisition tool of choice. Its the heavy artillery to get the job done.

[marki]

Yep Maxim is the one to go for. Many options to fine tune just about everything etc etc etc. Plate solve through pin point and so on.

Mark

[bmitchell82 (Brendan)]

+1 for maximdl
with the pinpoint plugin it ROCKS centring images is EASY AND ACCURATE.

Light on with resources ultra quick

I use it with my eeepc 1000HD (900MHz celron) without issue!

Feed back on corrections for actual arc seconds is gold!

[Terry B]

I use guidemaster (free) or CCDSoft. Both work well. I haven't spent the money on Maxim so can't comment on it.

[AlexN]

Another MaximDL fan... PHD is great for guiding when you're starting out because its free, easy and does the job well. But when you start stretching the focal length out, or just when you want your guiding to be that little bit tighter, PHDs simplicity becomes its Achilles heel, Maxim takes a bit of time to get it all running sweet, but the ability to exert control over every possible facet of the guiding is a real boon for ironing out those little detail smudging hiccups that other programs simply don't provide the ability to compensate for..

CCDSoft is very good also, if you have an SBIG camera.. If you're not running an SBIG imager with an SBIG filterwheel and preferably and SBIG guider (be it internal or remote guide etc) CCDSoft can be a pain in the backside.. (not to mention expensive to get addon packs to support other cameras/cfws/guiders etc..

[JohnH]

+1 for Guidemaster - has many of the features of Maxim but costs nothing.

[GrampianStars (Rob)]

http://www.stark-labs.com/phdguiding.html

"And the winner is...
2008: PHD Guiding - Reader’s Choice Gear of the Year for 2008 on Cloudy Nights

2007: The results are in from the 2007 AstroPhoto Insight survey run by SkyInsight and in the category of Guiding Software, there was a stand-out winner - PHD Guiding. Out of over 700 votes, PHD Guiding came in #1, beating the second most popular piece of software, the de facto standard Maxim DL, by over 50%. In fact, it did better than ACP, Astro IIDC, Equinox, Guide Dog, GuideMaster, K3CCDTools, Maxim Essentials, Maxim DSLR, and Meade Envisage... combined! I knew many people used PHD Guiding, but to say I was stunned at these results is an understatement on a grand scale. I wrote PHD Guiding to take the hassle out of accurate autoguiding and I give it away free as a way to help pay back the amateur community I've gotten so much from. With results like these, it's clear PHD Guiding has helped a lot of amateurs enjoy the hobby more and take better shots. Thank you all for helping make PHD Guiding what it is today. "

[g__day (Matthew)]

I think the gap is closing between PHD and MaximDL (having used them both). The current version 1.12.1 of PHD now allows you to adjust about 3/4 of the parameters I'd want to change on the fly, and see exactly how the tracking responds.

I think some more fuzzy logic is needed by PHDs brain, to compensate for seeing errors and backlash.

PHD has an enormous amount of user discussion and feedback into Craig Stark, easily triple the amount of discussion on the Maxim board - so as Craig gets time there is alot of push for where and how to improve PHD.

What I'd love to see is an experts side by side comparision of the two with analysis of results obtained to get rid of the subjectivity in this excellent question!

Matt

[Octane (Humayun)]

Didn't Troy run a poll on this exact question, to see who was using what?

Being a DSLR newb for so long, PHD Guiding was the go-to guide software.

When I first tried my STL, I used the bundled CCDSoft and was surprised at how well it guided with the recommended aggressive setting of 8. A little bit of a pain when running the calibration routine in that sometimes it wouldn't pick up enough movement in either axis, but, increasing the calibration time and ensuring that I wasn't using the hydrogen alpha filter at the time of calibration ensured it worked.

I do have Maxim and based on all the love shown here, may just try it next time. : )

H

[jase (Jason)]

Its the last 5% where the value is...

http://winfij.homeip.net/maximdl/pin...libration.html
http://winfij.homeip.net/maximdl/multiguide.html
http://winfij.homeip.net/maximdl/manualcalibration.html
http://winfij.homeip.net/maximdl/guider_settle.html

Reinforcing the point of feature rich software.

[Octane (Humayun)]

Jase,

Thanks for the links!

H

[troypiggo (Troy)]

Originally Posted by Octane

Didn't Troy run a poll on this exact question, to see who was using what?
...

Almost the same question - but it wasn't "what is the best guiding software", it was just asking what guiding software you use.

http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/s...ad.php?t=47274

PHD was the clear winner. But being popular is often different from being the best. MaximDL is second-most popular.

[marki]

Originally Posted by troypiggo

Almost the same question - but it wasn't "what is the best guiding software", it was just asking what guiding software you use.

http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/s...ad.php?t=47274

PHD was the clear winner. But being popular is often different from being the best. MaximDL is second-most popular.

PHD is free, maxim costs bucks. Maxim may be second most popular but it is definately the best.

Mark

[Bassnut (Fred)]

Originally Posted by jase

Its the last 5% where the value is...

http://winfij.homeip.net/maximdl/pin...libration.html
http://winfij.homeip.net/maximdl/multiguide.html
http://winfij.homeip.net/maximdl/manualcalibration.html
http://winfij.homeip.net/maximdl/guider_settle.html

Reinforcing the point of feature rich software.

Jase

Have you actually used these plugins, if so, how do you find them to use?.

[Peter Ward]

If you can still run DOS & have an older AO7, CCDOPS could quite happily guide at 35hz with a suitably bright guide star.....

Just like there is no Concorde replacement, technology doesn't always get better with time

[jase (Jason)]

Originally Posted by Bassnut

Jase

Have you actually used these plugins, if so, how do you find them to use?.

Yes Fred.

I use to operating the guider settling script when using the FSQ/STL11k with the internal guide chip. As the shutter closes to read out the main imaging sensor, guiding could not continue. Once the read out and download was complete, the guider was reinitialised...sometime the original guide star had moved several pixels from where it was at the before the shutter closed. To ensure MaximDL didn't start the exposure before the guider recentered the star, I used this script. In maximDL you can alter the time between exposures to address this too. Now using ACP, the guider error tolerance level is integrated, so I no longer use the script.

Multi star guiding is something else. Initially I though it sounded too good to be true, but its actually very effective. Some report that guiding on multiple stars reduces the impact of seeing, but in reality I don't see how this could be. If you're guiding on axis with a narrow field of view, you've probably only got on or two stars on the guide chip to start with. Secondly, if you're guiding with a wide field instrument, the seeing conditions are hardly going to be detected. My philosphy was probably too simple given Jim McMillan's analysis who wrote an extensive paper on guiding breaks it down further stating;

Regarding seeing, at least in my location, the effects are not just rapid, random oscillations around a point, but can also consist of rather large movements where one oscillation may last for many seconds at a time. For the sake of this discussion, I will call the rapid oscillations “fast seeing” and the multi-second oscillations “slow seeing.” My suspicions are that slow seeing is caused by multiple heat/cold sources typical of suburbia that create a number of columns of air at varying temperatures (think chimneys, ponds, grassy areas, rooftops, parking lots, trees, etc.). The effects of fast seeing are quite different over a very small FOV while the effects of slow seeing are similar over a relatively large FOV. Therefore, using multiple guide stars with a FOV of about 30 arcmin virtually eliminates the effects of fast seeing but is much less effective in eliminating the effects of slow seeing.

What Jim also confirms is that multi star guiding increases the signal to noise empowering the calculations of the guiding algorithm. In short, it allows you to guide on fainter stars as the centroids across them all are inputs to the algorithm. I can testify this actually works well. Again with the FSQ/STL11k using the internal guide chip, I had no issues in guiding on faint stars though a Ha filter (admittedly it wasn't a 3nm filter), but it has its uses.

Perhaps most interesting to me is the effect Guide Star S/N ratio has on the accuracy of the centroiding algorithm. While it is understood that Guide Star S/N ratio is an important component of this calculation, I did not appreciate how critical a component it actually is. When using multiple guide stars, you have the opportunity to compare the Guide Star S/N ratio of each guide star to the range of values computed for their centroids. This comparison is valid because these values (Guide Star S/N ratio and centroid) are computed for each star at the exact same time (e.g. same seeing conditions) over a number of guide cycles. As expected, the higher the Guide Star S/N ratio, the lower the range of computed values for their centroids. What is surprising is how high the Guide Star S/N ratio needs to be for the calculation to be reliable.

If you haven't tried them, they're worth a shot. Even simply from the educational perspective getting to know your set up further.

Can you guide with precision not using these plug-ins, most certainly! Guiding algorithms from product to product these days compute centroids extremely accurately, however some products make it easier to tweak and understand whats going on (again feature rich).

Of course there are many factors at play here when it comes to guiding;
A) Software configuration not correct
B) Calibration is not accurate to calculate the correct X/Y movement
C) Equipment that is not accurately polar aligned, exhibit flexure, or is not well balanced
D) Troubled by the seeing conditions

At the end of the night, it doesn't matter what software you use if you've got the above issues, you're going to have guiding problems!!!

That all said and done - MaximDL

[gregbradley]

This is turning out to be a very informative thread. I had hoped so.

I wonder if there is any software or if script can be written where several guide exposures are taken over say 1-3 seconds and the least deviation from the last guide correction image is used to minimise fast seeing also.

So if you had multiple stars guiding and then multiple guide exposures and the least different exposure used as the actual most probable guide correction needed it possibly could improve results further.

It would assume a guide camera capable of taking 1 second or less and a mount where guide exposures of 3 seconds or more won't let the PE build up too much between corrections.

What guide exposure lengths are various members using for what mount?

I have found time and time again 1 second or less is best for my Tak NJP. I have been told you'll be chasing the seeing but I don't see that occurring unless on those really bad seeing days when you can see the correction amounts varying too much.

Greg.

[AlexN]

I've used many variations of exposures with different guide cams, scopes and mount setups, though I've always found guide exposures over 2 seconds provide the best, most reliable guiding.