Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [ccd-newastro] The Iris Nebula

Expand Messages
  • Eddie Pavlu
    Great image Hap. Eddie From: ccd-newastro@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ccd-newastro@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Hap Griffin Sent: Monday, October 11, 2010 2:45 PM
    Message 1 of 29 , Oct 11, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      Great image Hap.

      Eddie



      From: ccd-newastro@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ccd-newastro@yahoogroups.com]
      On Behalf Of Hap Griffin
      Sent: Monday, October 11, 2010 2:45 PM
      To: ccd-newastro@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: [ccd-newastro] The Iris Nebula





      http://www.machunter.org/hap_ccd_ngc7023.html

      2 hours luminance and 1 hour each RGB from my QSI 583wsg and Planewave
      12.6" CDK.

      I hope you enjoy it.

      Hap Griffin
      www.machunter.org
      www.imaginginfinity.com

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Terry Tuggle
      Hap, Well done! Both images came out Very Well! All the best, Terry T. _____ From: ccd-newastro@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ccd-newastro@yahoogroups.com] On
      Message 2 of 29 , Oct 11, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        Hap,

        Well done! Both images came out Very Well!



        All the best,

        Terry T.



        _____

        From: ccd-newastro@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ccd-newastro@yahoogroups.com] On
        Behalf Of Hap Griffin
        Sent: Monday, October 11, 2010 4:45 PM
        To: ccd-newastro@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: [ccd-newastro] The Iris Nebula





        http://www.machunter.org/hap_ccd_ngc7023.html

        2 hours luminance and 1 hour each RGB from my QSI 583wsg and Planewave 12.6"
        CDK.

        I hope you enjoy it.

        Hap Griffin
        www.machunter.org
        www.imaginginfinity.com

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Dean S
        Great images Hap. I did not think those small pixels would do so well on a long F/L scope. Was this 1x1 or 2x2?? Dean ... From: Hap Griffin
        Message 3 of 29 , Oct 11, 2010
        • 0 Attachment
          Great images Hap. I did not think those small pixels would do so well on a
          long F/L scope. Was this 1x1 or 2x2??

          Dean


          ----- Original Message -----
          From: "Hap Griffin" <lgriffin@...>
          To: <ccd-newastro@yahoogroups.com>
          Sent: Monday, October 11, 2010 4:40 PM
          Subject: [ccd-newastro] NGC891 from Saturday night


          > http://www.machunter.org/hap_ccd_ngc891.html
          >
          > 2 hours luminance and 1 hour each RGB with my QSI 583wsg through a
          > Planewave 12.5" CDK.
          >
          > I hope you enjoy it.
          >
          > Hap Griffin
          > www.machunter.org
          > www.imaginginfinity.com
          >
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >
          >
          >
          > ------------------------------------
          >
          >
          >
          >
        • MarkM
          Really incredible, Hap. Nice work. Makes me want a QSI. -Mark. www.astronomysoup.com
          Message 4 of 29 , Oct 11, 2010
          • 0 Attachment
            Really incredible, Hap. Nice work. Makes me want a QSI.

            -Mark.
            www.astronomysoup.com



            --- In ccd-newastro@yahoogroups.com, "Ron Brant" <brant.r.d@...> wrote:
            >
            > Beautiful Hap, one of my all time favorite galaxies.
            > rb
            > ----- Original Message -----
            > From: Hap Griffin
            > To: ccd-newastro@yahoogroups.com
            > Sent: Monday, October 11, 2010 1:40 PM
            > Subject: [ccd-newastro] NGC891 from Saturday night
            >
            >
            >
            > http://www.machunter.org/hap_ccd_ngc891.html
            >
            > 2 hours luminance and 1 hour each RGB with my QSI 583wsg through a Planewave 12.5" CDK.
            >
            > I hope you enjoy it.
            >
            > Hap Griffin
            > www.machunter.org
            > www.imaginginfinity.com
            >
            > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            >
          • Barry Morton
            That s first class - wonderful. Barry Morton Worcester - UK
            Message 5 of 29 , Oct 12, 2010
            • 0 Attachment
              That's first class - wonderful.

              Barry Morton
              Worcester - UK

              --- In ccd-newastro@yahoogroups.com, "Hap Griffin" <lgriffin@...> wrote:
              >
              > http://www.machunter.org/hap_ccd_ngc891.html
              >
              > 2 hours luminance and 1 hour each RGB with my QSI 583wsg through a Planewave 12.5" CDK.
              >
              > I hope you enjoy it.
              >
              > Hap Griffin
              > www.machunter.org
              > www.imaginginfinity.com
              >
              >
              > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              >
            • Hap Griffin
              Luminance is 1x1 and color is 2x2. Hap From: Dean S Sent: Monday, October 11, 2010 8:40 PM To: ccd-newastro@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [ccd-newastro] NGC891
              Message 6 of 29 , Oct 12, 2010
              • 0 Attachment
                Luminance is 1x1 and color is 2x2.

                Hap



                From: Dean S
                Sent: Monday, October 11, 2010 8:40 PM
                To: ccd-newastro@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: Re: [ccd-newastro] NGC891 from Saturday night



                Great images Hap. I did not think those small pixels would do so well on a
                long F/L scope. Was this 1x1 or 2x2??

                Dean

                ----- Original Message -----
                From: "Hap Griffin" <lgriffin@...>
                To: <ccd-newastro@yahoogroups.com>
                Sent: Monday, October 11, 2010 4:40 PM
                Subject: [ccd-newastro] NGC891 from Saturday night

                > http://www.machunter.org/hap_ccd_ngc891.html
                >
                > 2 hours luminance and 1 hour each RGB with my QSI 583wsg through a
                > Planewave 12.5" CDK.
                >
                > I hope you enjoy it.
                >
                > Hap Griffin
                > www.machunter.org
                > www.imaginginfinity.com
                >
                >
                > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                >
                >
                >
                > ------------------------------------
                >
                >
                >
                >





                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • Stan
                ... Very nice, Hap. But the display image is undersampled and does not show the the galaxy at the resolution it deserves. Presumably the original image is
                Message 7 of 29 , Oct 12, 2010
                • 0 Attachment
                  --- "Hap Griffin" <lgriffin@...> wrote:
                  > http://www.machunter.org/hap_ccd_ngc891.html

                  Very nice, Hap.

                  But the display image is undersampled and does not show the the galaxy at the resolution it deserves. Presumably the original image is better sampled?

                  Stan
                • Hap Griffin
                  Oh yes. I ll try to get a full res version up later tonight. Hap From: Stan Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2010 11:47 AM To: ccd-newastro@yahoogroups.com Subject:
                  Message 8 of 29 , Oct 12, 2010
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Oh yes. I'll try to get a full res version up later tonight.

                    Hap



                    From: Stan
                    Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2010 11:47 AM
                    To: ccd-newastro@yahoogroups.com
                    Subject: [ccd-newastro] Re: NGC891 from Saturday night



                    --- "Hap Griffin" <lgriffin@...> wrote:
                    > http://www.machunter.org/hap_ccd_ngc891.html

                    Very nice, Hap.

                    But the display image is undersampled and does not show the the galaxy at the resolution it deserves. Presumably the original image is better sampled?

                    Stan





                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • Hap Griffin
                    There is now a link to the full res version on the web page. Let me know what you think. Hap From: Stan Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2010 11:47 AM To:
                    Message 9 of 29 , Oct 12, 2010
                    • 0 Attachment
                      There is now a link to the full res version on the web page. Let me know what you think.

                      Hap



                      From: Stan
                      Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2010 11:47 AM
                      To: ccd-newastro@yahoogroups.com
                      Subject: [ccd-newastro] Re: NGC891 from Saturday night



                      --- "Hap Griffin" <lgriffin@...> wrote:
                      > http://www.machunter.org/hap_ccd_ngc891.html

                      Very nice, Hap.

                      But the display image is undersampled and does not show the the galaxy at the resolution it deserves. Presumably the original image is better sampled?

                      Stan





                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • Stan
                      ... Well, since you asked – there are some processing defects and artifacts that impair the image. Those offset teal spots in many of the stars indicate
                      Message 10 of 29 , Oct 13, 2010
                      • 0 Attachment
                        --- "Hap Griffin" <lgriffin@...> wrote:
                        > http://www.machunter.org/hap_ccd_ngc891.html
                        > There is now a link to the full res version on the web page.
                        > Let me know what you think.

                        Well, since you asked – there are some processing defects and artifacts that impair the image. Those offset teal spots in many of the stars indicate imprecise registration in addition to a color-combine malfunction (or "feature" <g>). The galaxy exhibits unnatural mottling that is probably due to over application of "noise reduction".

                        Those issues are minimized in the down-sampled display and maybe you processed with that in mind. But full scale display is not so forgiving and benefits from precise data-processing with only a light touch of photo(shop)-processing. Have you tried CCDStack?

                        Stan
                      • dan kowall
                        Take a look at just the blue channel, Hap. Some processing step has messed up the stars.  The red channel shows a bit of the same affect. dan kowall ... From:
                        Message 11 of 29 , Oct 13, 2010
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Take a look at just the blue channel, Hap.
                          Some processing step has messed up the stars.  The red channel shows a bit of the same affect.

                          dan kowall

                          ___________
                          --- On Tue, 10/12/10, Hap Griffin <lgriffin@...> wrote:

                          From: Hap Griffin <lgriffin@...>
                          Subject: Re: [ccd-newastro] Re: NGC891 from Saturday night
                          To: ccd-newastro@yahoogroups.com
                          Date: Tuesday, October 12, 2010, 6:07 PM







                           









                          There is now a link to the full res version on the web page. Let me know what you think.



                          Hap



                          From: Stan

                          Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2010 11:47 AM

                          To: ccd-newastro@yahoogroups.com

                          Subject: [ccd-newastro] Re: NGC891 from Saturday night



                          --- "Hap Griffin" <lgriffin@...> wrote:

                          > http://www.machunter.org/hap_ccd_ngc891.html



                          Very nice, Hap.



                          But the display image is undersampled and does not show the the galaxy at the resolution it deserves. Presumably the original image is better sampled?



                          Stan



                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

























                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        • Hap Griffin
                          You re right. I ll backtrack and find out where the problem came in. Hap From: dan kowall Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 1:38 PM To:
                          Message 12 of 29 , Oct 13, 2010
                          • 0 Attachment
                            You're right. I'll backtrack and find out where the problem came in.

                            Hap



                            From: dan kowall
                            Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 1:38 PM
                            To: ccd-newastro@yahoogroups.com
                            Subject: Re: [ccd-newastro] Re: NGC891 from Saturday night



                            Take a look at just the blue channel, Hap.
                            Some processing step has messed up the stars. The red channel shows a bit of the same affect.

                            dan kowall

                            ___________
                            --- On Tue, 10/12/10, Hap Griffin <lgriffin@...> wrote:

                            From: Hap Griffin <lgriffin@...>
                            Subject: Re: [ccd-newastro] Re: NGC891 from Saturday night
                            To: ccd-newastro@yahoogroups.com
                            Date: Tuesday, October 12, 2010, 6:07 PM



                            There is now a link to the full res version on the web page. Let me know what you think.

                            Hap

                            From: Stan

                            Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2010 11:47 AM

                            To: ccd-newastro@yahoogroups.com

                            Subject: [ccd-newastro] Re: NGC891 from Saturday night

                            --- "Hap Griffin" <lgriffin@...> wrote:

                            > http://www.machunter.org/hap_ccd_ngc891.html

                            Very nice, Hap.

                            But the display image is undersampled and does not show the the galaxy at the resolution it deserves. Presumably the original image is better sampled?

                            Stan

                            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

                            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





                            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          • Hap Griffin
                            I do have a full license for the latest CCDStack, although I ve generally not used it much since ImagesPlus is much faster at calibration and stacking. I ll
                            Message 13 of 29 , Oct 13, 2010
                            • 0 Attachment
                              I do have a full license for the latest CCDStack, although I've generally not used it much since ImagesPlus is much faster at calibration and stacking. I'll backtrack and find where the registration errors came in.

                              Hap



                              From: Stan
                              Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 12:25 PM
                              To: ccd-newastro@yahoogroups.com
                              Subject: [ccd-newastro] Re: NGC891 from Saturday night



                              --- "Hap Griffin" <lgriffin@...> wrote:
                              > http://www.machunter.org/hap_ccd_ngc891.html
                              > There is now a link to the full res version on the web page.
                              > Let me know what you think.

                              Well, since you asked - there are some processing defects and artifacts that impair the image. Those offset teal spots in many of the stars indicate imprecise registration in addition to a color-combine malfunction (or "feature" <g>). The galaxy exhibits unnatural mottling that is probably due to over application of "noise reduction".

                              Those issues are minimized in the down-sampled display and maybe you processed with that in mind. But full scale display is not so forgiving and benefits from precise data-processing with only a light touch of photo(shop)-processing. Have you tried CCDStack?

                              Stan





                              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                            • Stan
                              ... In what way? Are you saying that IP wins a calibration race against CS2? (e.g. press the calibrate button and then time the number of seconds to
                              Message 14 of 29 , Oct 14, 2010
                              • 0 Attachment
                                --- "Hap Griffin" <lgriffin@...> wrote:
                                > ImagesPlus is much faster at calibration and stacking.

                                In what way?

                                Are you saying that IP wins a calibration race against CS2? (e.g. press the "calibrate" button and then time the number of seconds to calibrate a stack). Are you using 64 bit OS? If not then CS caches, which really slow things down.

                                Or do you mean that IP requires less user effort and makes more automatic decisions (or offers fewer options) so that the process goes faster? (btw faster is not always better <g>)

                                I am interested in your opinions but maybe we should take this off-list...

                                Stan
                              • Rogelio Bernal Andreo
                                ... Actually I would love to see a comparison in the different registration methods offered by ImagesPlus, CCDStack and PixInsight (I add PI to the equation
                                Message 15 of 29 , Oct 14, 2010
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  > I am interested in your opinions but maybe we should take this off-list...

                                  Actually I would love to see a comparison in the different
                                  registration methods offered by ImagesPlus, CCDStack and PixInsight (I
                                  add PI to the equation because it's the one I use now).

                                  As for speed, different people may favor faster execution if the
                                  difference in quality is not great, and likewise, others don't mind
                                  longer processing time if that results in better quality no matter how
                                  small. Sometimes even price vs additional features may be a factor! So
                                  the comparison should probably focus on the results and then everyone
                                  would decide what goes better with them. If anyone's up to the task,
                                  there's the idea.

                                  Cheers,
                                  Rogelio
                                • Hap Griffin
                                  I have both so will be glad to run some tests. My opinion is based on a lot of experience with IP and relatively little with CCDStack, so take it with a grain
                                  Message 16 of 29 , Oct 14, 2010
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    I have both so will be glad to run some tests. My opinion is based on a lot of experience with IP and relatively little with CCDStack, so take it with a grain of salt until we can run some actual comparisons. I'm running a quad core, Windows 7 32 bit with 4 gigs of RAM...a fairly typical machine today. ImagesPlus is wickedly fast at calibrating a set of 16 images with darks, flats and biases. I just ran a test with 16 1x1 luminance frames from my QSI 583 ( 3326 x 2504 pixels) calibrated with 16 darks, 16 flats and 16 biases. It completes the batch operation in 70 seconds. That includes normalizing and combining the flats and combining all of the biases and darks and using these generated masters to calibrate the image frames. Where it is fastest is when you have a dark master, a flat master and a bias master already done. In that case, it calibrates a 16 image set in 20 seconds. Doing an autostar alignment on those same 16 calibrated frames takes 21 seconds.

                                    It's also great with batch processing huge stacks of images. This week, I calibrated, aligned and processed a stack of 110 2x2 images of Comet 103P for an animation. Opening 110 images only takes a few seconds. Doing the same process on them only takes a few more and re-sizing them to 640x480 pixels and converting them all to JPEG is just a few more. Having 110 images open at once and being able to blink through them at video speed is nice.

                                    Hap



                                    From: Stan
                                    Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2010 11:38 AM
                                    To: ccd-newastro@yahoogroups.com
                                    Subject: [ccd-newastro] Re: NGC891 from Saturday night



                                    --- "Hap Griffin" <lgriffin@...> wrote:
                                    > ImagesPlus is much faster at calibration and stacking.

                                    In what way?

                                    Are you saying that IP wins a calibration race against CS2? (e.g. press the "calibrate" button and then time the number of seconds to calibrate a stack). Are you using 64 bit OS? If not then CS caches, which really slow things down.

                                    Or do you mean that IP requires less user effort and makes more automatic decisions (or offers fewer options) so that the process goes faster? (btw faster is not always better <g>)

                                    I am interested in your opinions but maybe we should take this off-list...

                                    Stan





                                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                  • Hap Griffin
                                    I have found that the problem with my NGC891 image comes in after the L and RGB images are combined in Photoshop. The RGB image is in perfect alignment out of
                                    Message 17 of 29 , Oct 14, 2010
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      I have found that the problem with my NGC891 image comes in after the L and RGB images are combined in Photoshop. The RGB image is in perfect alignment out of ImagesPlus. The artifact in the stars on the red and blue channels looks to be related to the relative star sizes in the RGB and L images. I'm still investigating.

                                      Hap



                                      From: Rogelio Bernal Andreo
                                      Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2010 1:44 PM
                                      To: ccd-newastro@yahoogroups.com
                                      Subject: Re: [ccd-newastro] Re: NGC891 from Saturday night



                                      > I am interested in your opinions but maybe we should take this off-list...

                                      Actually I would love to see a comparison in the different
                                      registration methods offered by ImagesPlus, CCDStack and PixInsight (I
                                      add PI to the equation because it's the one I use now).

                                      As for speed, different people may favor faster execution if the
                                      difference in quality is not great, and likewise, others don't mind
                                      longer processing time if that results in better quality no matter how
                                      small. Sometimes even price vs additional features may be a factor! So
                                      the comparison should probably focus on the results and then everyone
                                      would decide what goes better with them. If anyone's up to the task,
                                      there's the idea.

                                      Cheers,
                                      Rogelio




                                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                    • Stan
                                      ... Then don t bother comparing because CCDStack will be severely hobbled by that obsolete OS. Why did you decide to cripple that machine with a 32 bit OS??
                                      Message 18 of 29 , Oct 15, 2010
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        --- "Hap Griffin" <lgriffin@...> wrote:
                                        > I'm running a quad core, Windows 7 32 bit with 4 gigs of RAM

                                        Then don't bother comparing because CCDStack will be severely hobbled by that obsolete OS. Why did you decide to cripple that machine with a 32 bit OS?? (which BTW cannot even address the installed 4GB RAM?)

                                        CCDStack was really designed for 64 bit OS (or small stacks) and makes use of many 64 bit advantages. It can run on a 32 bit OS but if the images or stack are large then it must resort to disk caching.

                                        Stan
                                      • Hap Griffin
                                        Stan, I fully understand the merits of a 64 bit system. If it s crippled by the 32 bit OS, how can I have 110 full FITS images open at once in ImagesPlus
                                        Message 19 of 29 , Oct 15, 2010
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          Stan, I fully understand the merits of a 64 bit system. If it's "crippled" by the 32 bit OS, how can I have 110 full FITS images open at once in ImagesPlus and do fast batch operations on them? For instance, with all 100 images open at once, I can apply a filter or DDP to all of them in just a few seconds.

                                          Hap



                                          From: Stan
                                          Sent: Friday, October 15, 2010 2:55 PM
                                          To: ccd-newastro@yahoogroups.com
                                          Subject: [ccd-newastro] Re: NGC891 from Saturday night



                                          --- "Hap Griffin" <lgriffin@...> wrote:
                                          > I'm running a quad core, Windows 7 32 bit with 4 gigs of RAM

                                          Then don't bother comparing because CCDStack will be severely hobbled by that obsolete OS. Why did you decide to cripple that machine with a 32 bit OS?? (which BTW cannot even address the installed 4GB RAM?)

                                          CCDStack was really designed for 64 bit OS (or small stacks) and makes use of many 64 bit advantages. It can run on a 32 bit OS but if the images or stack are large then it must resort to disk caching.

                                          Stan





                                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                        • Stan
                                          ... I am not privy to IP specs or design (in fact I have never even used it) but there are many potential areas that could result in IP being able to process
                                          Message 20 of 29 , Oct 15, 2010
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            --- "Hap Griffin" <lgriffin@...> wrote:
                                            > ... If it's "crippled" by the 32 bit OS, how can I have 110 full
                                            > FITS images open at once in ImagesPlus...

                                            I am not privy to IP specs or design (in fact I have never even used it) but there are many potential areas that could result in IP being able to process more/faster frames in 32 bit OS than CCDStack, e.g bit depth of images (CCDStack uses single precision floating point, many other programs use 16 bit integer), handling of bitmaps and ancillary data structures (e.g. CCDStack uses special pixel rejection maps, it also stores special frames to accelerate processing, such as pre-blurred frames for quick calculation of unsharp-masking and fast 32-to8 bit scaling).

                                            One possible area that would allow more non-cached images in IP is if it is written in MFC, which is an old Microsoft UI construction. CCDStack uses the more modern .NET framework, which restricts the amount of usable memory for 32 bit apps (unfortunately for 32 bit users). Not only does the .NET framework require a significant memory footprint itself but it allocates the limited 32 bit address blocks in a way that results in making only about 1 GB available to large-memory-model applications (due to stack, heap and large object memory allocation designs). None of those limitations exist in 64 bit and it is obvious that Microsoft designed .NET for 64 bit, which they originally meant as the default OS when planning for Vista. It was very disheartening when the manufacturers/retailers devalued Vista by selling the 32 bit version (and IMHO was largely responsible for the bad reception that met Vista). I am surprised that MS even offers a 32 bit W-7 and it seems to be rare for new computers (Apple got rid of 32 bit more than a decade ago).

                                            When I envisioned CCDStack, Microsoft was putting out strong signals that MFC was a thing of the past and the future is .NET. So I decided to develop CCDStack for the future. I had to do some major programming to accommodate 32 bit users (e.g. caching) and CCDStack does not perform very well in 32 bit on huge stacks. But it looks like the future is finally arriving and it seems now that most new users have 64 bit machines.

                                            Stan
                                          • Stan
                                            ... Well, it s really an apples to oranges comparison (because of the different UI and processing designs) but CCDStack applies DDP in *real time* as you
                                            Message 21 of 29 , Oct 15, 2010
                                            • 0 Attachment
                                              --- "Hap Griffin" <lgriffin@...> wrote:
                                              > ... I can apply a filter or DDP to all of them in just
                                              > a few seconds.

                                              Well, it's really an "apples to oranges" comparison (because of the different UI and processing designs) but CCDStack applies DDP in *real time* as you watch the image change in response to varying parameters that you control with sliders (i.e. it recalculates the image dozens of times per second). Then you can apply such settings (DDP, gamma, etc) to the entire stack in the time it takes you to click the "apply to all" checkbox.

                                              Furthermore, CCDStack does not change (damage) the underlying data when you apply such transforms (DDP, gamma, sharpening, etc.) but only uses those transforms when generating a display bitmap (which usually takes a fraction of a second).

                                              They are very different programs. I can understand how you could get comfortable with one and be reluctant to really figure out how to use the other...

                                              Stan
                                            • Stan
                                              ... I want to be clear that CCDStack is very capable on 32 bit machines and there are many happy CCDStack users working with 32 bit computers. Although
                                              Message 22 of 29 , Oct 16, 2010
                                              • 0 Attachment
                                                > ... there are many potential areas that could result in IP
                                                > being able to process more/faster frames in 32 bit OS than
                                                > CCDStack...

                                                I want to be clear that CCDStack is very capable on 32 bit machines and there are many happy CCDStack users working with 32 bit computers.

                                                Although processing huge stacks is slower in 32 bits, the full power of the software is still available. Many users don't experience any slowdown at all by avoiding unnecessarily large stacks (numerous overly short sub-exps result in excessive read-noise that degrades the final image). And even for large stacks it can be worthwhile to have a small amount of patience (a few seconds or less) in order to have more control and insight over the processes and to achieve superior results...

                                                Stan
                                              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.