Sorry you had to go to such trouble to get Pempro to work for you.
I fully support your irritation with SB over their inability or just plane stubbornness in refusing to admit that the PEC routine just doesn't work for us down here!
I may have figured out what is wrong with PEC in the S.H. I posted the following on the Bisque forum (which requires one to log in to read). If anyone with a Paramount is willing to try this and confirm, I'd be most appreciative.
I had to redo the PEC for my MX+ recently and given the S.H. issues with TSX/PEC I thought I’d compare the results with PEMpro comparing both the old and new way of generating PEC in TSX. I’m running build 13811
My main camera was used and the plate scale was .5 arc-sec. This was the value used by both TSX and PEMPro
1. I started with PEMpro and generated a curve as seen in the photo of the Bisque TCS. This curve reduced my PTO of 2.2 arc-sec to unmeasurable. (see photo of the curve in the Bisque TCS)
2. I switched my main imaging camera to the guider camera, rotated the camera so that X=RA and collected a log as contained in the folder. It measured a PTP of 1.1 arc-sec (obviously with the PEMPro correction turned off) using the image scale of .5 arc-sec . I find it curious that this is exactly 50% smaller than the PEMpro measurement. Coincidence? I did not bother loading the curve because it was obviously not going to work given the PEMpro curve at double value was working. (Guiding log is in the folder)
3. I then gathered PEC in the new automated way after calibrating the imaging camera. Again the curve was measured to be 50% of the value of the PEMpro measurement, and then the measurement was saved to the mount obviously inverted. The correced PE worsened by 50% and the message was “PEC failed.” (see photo of results and photo of curve as automatically saved to the mount.)
I think there may be clues here to hopefully fix the issue with broken PEC in the SH. I have a sense that if one used a plate scale double the actual (in the old method), and then saved the curve inverted, PEC would work.
To test my theory, double your actual plate image scale when running the automatic version of PEC inTheSkyX. That is, if your actual resolution is .5 arc-sec, set 1 arc-sec in the tool. The run will "fail" because the generated curve will be inverted from what it needs to be and your pE will double.. The correct curve is an inverted curve; copy it (no white spaces) and load to the mount in the bisque TCS. It is the image.xxx.pec file in the train PEC folder.
If you compute the curve in the old way with a guiding log and your camera set X=RA, you can invert the curve in the compute PEC window. You may or may not need to invert it to get it to work. It seems the main issue is the incorrect manner in which the plate scale is handled in the computation of PE.
If you try this, please post your results here.
Thanks!
Peter
I hope that SB uses your investigation as the catalyst to galvanize them into remedial action and supply a software solution to finally fix this problem. It is long overdue.
On a personal note, I will continue to use PEMPro as I know it works.
I have wasted far too much time on the few nights I am able to set up, trying to get the SB methods (Legacy and the new TrainPEC) to work and it has left me somewhat jaded.
I know exactly why you feel as you do. I hope I'm right; the issue is so hopelessly long and ignored. Anyway, I had some free time during this moon period and thought it wouldn't be so hard to investigate.
Peter and others,when I first received the MX+ I read through the manual how to collect PEC and use It and had great results.
Showed 3.1" peak to peak and got a 0.9" result after implementing so, whats
changed in the latest builds since I have no idea.
With a 200 point model and ProTrack activated I was able to shoot 30 minute unguided exposures with my then FSQ 106.
No way I could of done that without that 0.9" pec and ProTrack.
From memory I think I just sent It to home position before I started recorded
data but don't quote me on that.....I might of adjusted Dec closer to 0.00
can't really remember for sure about that.
Maybe try going back to build around 2017 and see If that works and If It does It might give SB something closer to look at.
Well, you are one of few that claims it works properly. In my case I have no need to investigate as PEMPro works perfectly. My PEC went from 2.2 PTP to unmeasurable. On the same night, same image scale, same camera, etc using two different methods, TSX was unable to give any correction that looked anything like the very successful PEMPro model. I have owned two Paramounts for more than 15 years and I never once, 2017 or not, was able to achieve a successful PEC using TSX. I think you have been extremely lucky! Are your results repeatable? Are you still using a version of TSX from 2017? That is really quite old, and many things have changed, for sure!
My only reason for the experiment was because a friend - and relatively new user of TheSkyX with a MYT - has failed to get a usable PEC using TSX. He started a thread on the SB forum that went nowhere. I recommended PEMPro which he may try, but I do think he is right, Bisque needs to repair their damaged software. He is fully capable of following instructions and not inexperienced. (He writes scripts for Pixinsight!).
Peter, just so there's no further miss understanding. I wasn't meaning that anybody can't follow instructions or anything like(It's very simple) that but instead, just relaying my experience with the MX+ in the 2 years I owned It.
Oh and If you remember I did put up the results of my unguided image on the SB site and here on IIS so I think It's a little bit more than a claim
Multiple attempts over multiple nights, using both the Legacy Method and the new TrainPEC Method.
Result: 100% failure.
After I installed PEMPro, I had 100% success from Run 1 and subsequent runs as I investigated the issue.
I set up and tear down every session.
With PEC trained via PEMPro, a 100 Point T-Point Model, Accurate PA and ProTack enabled I have no issues with unguided 60 sec exposures at focal lengths of 2350mm (C9.25 F10) and 2415mm (Mewlon 210 F11.5).
I apologise if you took my comments in a way not intended! I don't doubt your success.... I know for a fact that the nearly certain position that Software Bisque takes with customers having issues with PEC is they have incorrectly run the procedure. Perhaps that has made me feel defensive and it wasn't intended to lessen what you wrote. I do find it curious that you could succeed when many of us have failed, hence my question as to whether you may have tried the procedure since your successful run?
All good Peter and as far as trying again since, well, didn't you buy my mount quite a few years back?
Anyway like you and others have said.... SB should address this issue and other bugs too from memory and not ignore the southern part of the world because of lower sales.....just a guess.
In sending some files requested by Software Bisque I made an embarrassing discovery. When moving my imaging camera over to the guider tab I forgot to reset the binning from 2x2 to 1x1. Consequently any comments I made with respect to needing to double the imaging scale are moot.
I still contend that the curve generated by TheSkyX is inverted (or reversed?) depending on one's terminogy. i.e, the curve goes neg when it needs to go positive and visa versa. It appears to follow fairly close the PEMPro curve in terms of phase.
I did two additional tests using "Train PEC" In both cases the resulting Bisque PEC was placed "inverted" in the TCS PEC window.
The two images below show this. Fortunately the phase seems correct so it ought to be a fairly simple fix to make this work for all users in the S.H.
Run 1 1 sec exposures 4 periods
Run 2 .5 sec exposures 4 periods
The green line is the Bisque curve.
The Red line is a working PEMPro result.
The PEMPro result does look smoother. This may or may not be due to these measurements being taken on different nights. The PEMpro was in excellent seeing. Last night was just average.
I truly hope that SB implements a fix for this long standing, vexatious software/system bug that cripples PEC Training in the Southern Hemisphere via TSX.
SB has responded that the PEC routine is much more complicated than I've made it out to be. Namely, they need data from both sides of the meridian, data from a mirrored camera, and with the camera where X does not = RA.
I will attempt to do this because I started this quest.
However, I also think what I've shown is straightforward and a basic scenario. One would expect the PEC software would at least come up with a workable solution.
When the moon is once again casting too much light I will return to this project!
SB has responded that the PEC routine is much more complicated than I've made it out to be. Namely, they need data from both sides of the meridian, data from a mirrored camera, and with the camera where X does not = RA.
I will attempt to do this because I started this quest.
However, I also think what I've shown is straightforward and a basic scenario. One would expect the PEC software would at least come up with a workable solution.
When the moon is once again casting too much light I will return to this project!
Peter
I think you are a real trooper with the ongoing work you do for SB.
I have previously uploaded data files from my efforts where the program bug was producing incorrect results, and I believe that others have too.
I still believe that we are not being taken seriously in the SH, which is a real shame. SB do not appear to have the resources or appetite to fix this.
Success was measured by comparing the successful PEC generated by PEMPro to TheSkyX results.
All of these tests were done with the new "Train PEC" option. I used my main imaging camera at .5 arc-sec for the first 2 tests, and 1 arc-sec for tests 3/4. The imaging camera was calibrated and x was not aligned with RA (as requested bt Software Bisque).
I have noticed (as others have also reported) that if the PEC is incorrect the 2nd part of Train PEC also fails. I believe this is because the incorrect inverted PEC drives the guide star out of the guiding box before the second part of Train PEC starts up. Perhaps using a much larger guiding box would solve this problem, however, the fact that the guide star is lost is an instantaneous warning that Train PEC has failed.
Thus far, no response from Software Bisque..... Hopefully this will lead to a repair.
Well done, Peter, I am impressed by your dogged determination in the face of numbingly unresponsive support, given that this behaviour has been reported by several competent users over many, many years.
Well done, Peter, I am impressed by your dogged determination in the face of numbingly unresponsive support, given that this behaviour has been reported by several competent users over many, many years.
