Hey Daniel! First i wanted to say Thanks for all your Videos ! They Really help out immensely! I was JUST mulling over if i wanted to Drop the $$ down for Pixinsite.. NOW? Looks like its 110% Worth it! thanks again man!
Awesome! I'm glad you're finding them helpful! Any suggestions for how I'm doing the video format? I'm considering doing future workflows in several smaller video segments covering each step, instead of longer videos.
@@ZoliroAstro that's a great idea man! Personally what I would like to see? Is how to stack fits files out of my 533 in pixinsight... I really havent seen a video that cuts thru the haze and starts there ..
@@ZoliroAstro AWESOME! Thanks man.. DSS has been giving me artifacts lately with The FITS files.. And when I have 80 of them? I don't really want to convert them all to use with sequator.haha.... Rather Go ALL in on Pixinsite. Start to finish and love Your teaching style. 🤘🏻
@@bloodstone2000 Thanks man, your comments are really encouraging. I've seen in my own experience where DSS can have issues with artifacts in the cores of stars, and also leave artifacts caused by the hot and cold pixel removal options.
I can't help it, the demons are making me do this. Vinyetting Vin-yetting. Oh good they are quiet now. In all seriousness though, thanks for the in depth video, well done and concise on a large topic. I wasn't aware of the PSF script, certainly seems easier than manually selecting a billion stars and spending half an hour trimming the list down. I'll have to give it a shot. vin-yet :P
@@ZoliroAstro lol nope, vin-yetting is the right way, you said vig-netting, unforgivable! Renders the rest of the video unusable! /sarcasm. I do btw appreciate your approach to gear vs. effort. Far too many times in this hobby, newbies with human style budgets (myself included) ask for guidance and receive the blanket answer of "spend more money, get more gear". I have the same APO as you, the AT115, and I love it. But it was the culmination of a year and a half of saving and rationalizing my need for it. Clean data is a luxury, despite what elite forum guardians would say. Thanks for stressing effort > money.
Lol, learn something new everyday. I guess it's like when people say camera ISO as "eye-ess-oh" like it's an acronym, when it's actually "eye-so." Anyways, thanks for the fun sarcasm, I'm a bit of a cheesy sarcasm person myself. 😁 And yes, when it comes to astrophotography, processing is king!
I'm not sure the detail difference between the two sets is due to pixel sizes. Seeing, yes, very possible, but I don't think the 533MC vs the 183MM pixel size difference makes that difference here.
It's hard to see in the video, but it definitely makes a difference. Now if you're comparing a photo done with the 533mc under good seeing conditions to a photo done with the 183mm done under poor seeing conditions, then there might not be much of a difference. But when the seeing conditions are similar, the smaller pixel scale of the 183mm makes a difference. The negative side of it is that the 183mm needs longer exposures or more integration time to match the larger pixels of the 533mc.
Excellent tutorial!
Thanks Chuck! And thanks for checking out a lowly astro channel like mine!
@@ZoliroAstro Always glad to see new people on the scene.
Hey Daniel, Thanks for taking the time to show us all how to do this.
Thank you Dennis!
Hey Daniel! First i wanted to say Thanks for all your Videos ! They Really help out immensely! I was JUST mulling over if i wanted to Drop the $$ down for Pixinsite.. NOW? Looks like its 110% Worth it! thanks again man!
Awesome! I'm glad you're finding them helpful! Any suggestions for how I'm doing the video format? I'm considering doing future workflows in several smaller video segments covering each step, instead of longer videos.
@@ZoliroAstro that's a great idea man! Personally what I would like to see? Is how to stack fits files out of my 533 in pixinsight... I really havent seen a video that cuts thru the haze and starts there ..
Ok, I can do a tutorial on using WBPP for stacking.
@@ZoliroAstro AWESOME! Thanks man.. DSS has been giving me artifacts lately with The FITS files.. And when I have 80 of them? I don't really want to convert them all to use with sequator.haha.... Rather Go ALL in on Pixinsite. Start to finish and love Your teaching style. 🤘🏻
@@bloodstone2000 Thanks man, your comments are really encouraging. I've seen in my own experience where DSS can have issues with artifacts in the cores of stars, and also leave artifacts caused by the hot and cold pixel removal options.
I can't help it, the demons are making me do this. Vinyetting Vin-yetting. Oh good they are quiet now.
In all seriousness though, thanks for the in depth video, well done and concise on a large topic. I wasn't aware of the PSF script, certainly seems easier than manually selecting a billion stars and spending half an hour trimming the list down. I'll have to give it a shot.
vin-yet :P
LOL, did I say "vinyetting"? I know how to say it haha 😂. Glad you liked the video! The PSFimage script is definitely a time saver.
@@ZoliroAstro lol nope, vin-yetting is the right way, you said vig-netting, unforgivable! Renders the rest of the video unusable! /sarcasm.
I do btw appreciate your approach to gear vs. effort. Far too many times in this hobby, newbies with human style budgets (myself included) ask for guidance and receive the blanket answer of "spend more money, get more gear". I have the same APO as you, the AT115, and I love it. But it was the culmination of a year and a half of saving and rationalizing my need for it. Clean data is a luxury, despite what elite forum guardians would say. Thanks for stressing effort > money.
Lol, learn something new everyday. I guess it's like when people say camera ISO as "eye-ess-oh" like it's an acronym, when it's actually "eye-so." Anyways, thanks for the fun sarcasm, I'm a bit of a cheesy sarcasm person myself. 😁
And yes, when it comes to astrophotography, processing is king!
great tutorial, thanks for posting! Would be very interested in a Benchmark of the M1 processor.
Thank you, I will make a video about it!
I'm not sure the detail difference between the two sets is due to pixel sizes. Seeing, yes, very possible, but I don't think the 533MC vs the 183MM pixel size difference makes that difference here.
It's hard to see in the video, but it definitely makes a difference. Now if you're comparing a photo done with the 533mc under good seeing conditions to a photo done with the 183mm done under poor seeing conditions, then there might not be much of a difference. But when the seeing conditions are similar, the smaller pixel scale of the 183mm makes a difference. The negative side of it is that the 183mm needs longer exposures or more integration time to match the larger pixels of the 533mc.
Waiting Part II
Working on it right now. I strained my voice a few days ago, so I had to wait a while. My voice still sounds a bit hoarse. Hopefully it's not too bad.