Pixinsight? Or what?

[MarkS]

I've finally decided to upgrade from IRIS.  It's limitation of 16 bit processing (well 15 bits in positive numbers) is really becoming a limitation to me.  I can work around the problems but it is becoming very time-consuming to do so.  I also want more sophisticated stacking.

Anyway I've downloaded the 45 day trial version of PixInsight because I've read many good reports (and some bad). 

The user interface is completely unlike anything I've ever come across before - the shock to the system of trying to use it is worse than the shock to the system of attempting to use Photoshop for the first time ever.  Remember the first time ever you struggled with "layers", "masks" etc?

A lot of the "processes" appear to be works in progress.  For instance the image calibration routine (darks, offsets, lights) will not remove hot pixels.  But on the other hand it automatically adjusts how much of the dark to apply to each frame - very useful for DSLRs where the CCD temperature (and hence noise) varies from sub to sub.

It's certainly very complicated to use for the first time but on the other hand it can be tailored to the nth degree to do just what you want it to do.  It has a thriving user community providing scripts to do various things.  The ability to perform scripting and pixel maths means it could be a very powerful tool in the right hands.

It's not cheap at 200 Euros so I wonder what other processing applications I should consider?

Mark

[Mac]

well you could always get virtualPC (other products are available) and get pas the 45 day limitation
so at least that way you can try it for longer,

Mac.

[MarkS]

Last night was more beating my head against a brick wall to understand how this program is supposed to work

Then I finally found a useful resource: Harry's Video Tutorials  (there are some video tutorials on the PixInsight site but they are mainly out of date and show how it used to work in a previous version of the program)
http://www.harrysastroshed.com/pixinsighthome.html

Now the whole thing is beginning to make sense.  If you want to get a quick "feel" for how it works take a look at:
http://www.harrysastroshed.com/ACDNR.html

The 45 day trial is a fully functional program in all respects.  
But every time you try to start it up it "phones home" with its individual code to obtain a token giving it permission to run.  
No internet, no run.

Mark

[Carole]

I saw a demo of that once Mark.  Put me right off attempting to use it.  I think you need to have a mathematical or technical mind to understand it. 

Glad you found Harry's tutorials.

Carole

[RobertM]

I've been using it exclusively for the last year or so.  Yes it is something to get your head around but once you do it opens up a whole new world.  It's easily extendible - you can write your own routines in JavaScript or C (I thInk) so seems right up your street.

One big plus is that the cost is a one off and includes all updates for life across all platforms.

Robert

[MarkS]

I'm glad to hear your recommendation Robert.  The more I'm playing with it the more I'm beginning to like it. 

You're right - I'm very much drawn to the idea of JavaScripting some of my standard sequences and writing some new ones.

I have already discovered a whole load more data in my 11 hour Horsehead image.

Mark

[Rocket Pooch]

It's a good tool I like the LRGB balance routines and the noise reduction.  However, most peoples images I have seen look like HDR nighmares when PixInsight is used.

Oh and its not intuative.

[RobertM]

However, most peoples images I have seen look like HDR nighmares when PixInsight is used.

Not surprising considering the defaults and the effects are not subtle in any way.

Agreed - Intuitive it is not ! But at least they are writing the manual now

[MarkS]

First attempt at processing my Horsey in PI.  I didn't stack in PI but used my previous 21bit HDR image as a starting point.  The Dynamic Background Extraction tool (used manually) was brilliantly simple and effective to use - it enabled me to pull out so much more background detail.

The screen transfer function was very useful in indicating very quickly indeed just how much data was available.



Larger version (3x3 binned):
http://www.markshelley.co.uk/webdisk/HH_PI_Test.jpg

I processed the whole image 3x3 binned so it ran much quicker while I get used to the tools.

Next challenge is how easy or complicated it is to write a script that will calibrate (including hot pixel removal), align and stack images overnight.

Mark

[mickw]

There is definitely more detail there but does this image look lighter ?

I can't figure out whether the extra detail is causing it or simply making the original brighter would reveal the extra detail.

Another cause could be my buggered up eyes 

[Rocket Pooch]

The Dynamic Background Extraction tool (used manually) was brilliantly simple and effective to use.

Why would you do that in an image that should be full of background colours?

Stars look less bloated though

[MarkS]

Why would you do that in an image that should be full of background colours?

Parts of the background (at the extreme edges) have no nebulosity but background gradients were visible in these areas.  DBE allows a user to click on those parts that should appear black and it will generate a smooth background consistent with just those parts, which can then be used for subtraction.  Very clever and extremely useful.  Especially when using a DSLR at F/2.8, where background gradients are a complete nightmare.

Mark