IRIS astrophotography software

[jjjnettie (Jeanette)]

Have any of you used IRIS?
It seems quite similar to Registax, and as a freeby, well worth the money.
Find it here
www.astrosurf.com
You can work with RAW and Fits files, align and stack, convert bmp and avi's, process with unsharp mask and wavelets etc etc.
I'd be very interested to hear what you think of it.

[RAJAH235]

Hi Jeanette. From what I've heard/read, it's a bit of a b**** to use.....??????
Others will soon let you know.
HAPPY NEW YEAR.....
L.

[asimov (John)]

I would like to hear opinions on this too.

[CometGuy]

Jeanette,

Even forgeting the free pricetag IRIS ts an amazing piece of software and the interface has improved greatly since the earlier version. If you follow the tutorials you'll soon get the swing of things.

Nice features of IRIS include:

1. RAW file conversion of DSLR files is excellent.
2. Star field registration capabilities excellent (for example it can compensate for shifts, rotations and distortion between images).
3. Background gradient removal is one of the best I have seen.

Re the interface, some things seem a little unconventional. For example if you want to batch convert multiple raw files you click the 'Decode raw files' menu and a blank window appears. You then use windows explorer to drag and drop files onto that blank window then when you have finished click convert. Its actually efficient, but doesn't follow normal MS Windows conventions. After you come to terms with this you begin to realise what a fantastic bit of software it is - I swear by it

Terry

[seeker372011 (Narayan)]

what Terry said.

far from easy to use when you first start but once you struggle past the initial learning curve you will probably find it indispensible

I found Jim Solomon's cookbook a great help in coming to grip with IRIS

http://www.saratogaskies.com/article...ook/index.html

but no, Registax it aint!

[Striker (Tony)]

It's the type of program you really have to follow and learn all the techniques thoroughly.

I personally hated it as I couldn't even follow the tutorials...I just found it too difficult to use.

It's Free so what more can you ask for....and it's a very popular program.

[jjjnettie (Jeanette)]

My initial thought was that it has more processing capabilities than Registax. I don't have any of the high end software that I can use on my pics, only simple programs that come with cheapie digital cameras.
But the interface as you say, takes a bit of getting used to.
I'll look up some beginner tutorials on the net I think.

[davidpretorius]

i still use registax for planets as there is no way in iris to sort thru and get rid of the bad images. registax is far quicker on say 500 - 1000 images than iris. wavelets is much better in registax

what iris is great for is dso objects. i am still learning this area, as my tracking on my dob is working well, but nowhere near perfect.

i was able to give 10 x 30 sec exposures using the modified toucam a go last night. iris was able to median add these and then subtract an average dark (5 x 30 sec).

i am happy with this so far. I really do like iris for any star work!

i am doing this in grey as i have stuffed up the raw colour conversion

[asimov (John)]

That's not a bad m42 Davo!

Seeing I only image planets I'll give IRIS a miss then.

[asimov (John)]

Oh! I just spotted your post count.....congrats on 3000 posts!

[jjjnettie (Jeanette)]

I downloaded a Registax tutorial last night. I was just trying to work out how to use it on my own. The first pic shows how far I got. The 2nd pic was processed following the tutorial. The avi. was taken using a Panasonic digital video, hand held and very shakey.
I thought what I achieved was pretty good, concidering the quality of the .avi.
Also I managed to squeeze a tiny bit of nebulosity from an avi of M42. Not much, just faint pixels, but the shape was there.
The camera can go down to 1 lux, and the max exposure is 1/50 sec, so there is only so much I can capture.

[seeker372011 (Narayan)]

thats very well done