Hi Rob,

sorry to hear Win7 may be an expensive proposition for you. I got the
$50 early upgrade when it was offered back in Sept (or whenever it was).
I think an OEM copy (need to combine with hardware purchase) is around
$100 for Win7 home ultimate. It's really quite a shame that pricing is
so different across the pond.

I think ultimately you'll find it worth your while though. My i7-920
with 6GB positively flies. Naturally DSS runs no faster than on your
system but being able to keep it and PI and Firefox (hog) and Excel
running at the same time is very nice indeed.

Sander

Hemmings, Rob K. wrote:
>
> Hi Sander,
>
> I agree with everything you say (I'm a computer pro) - just
> wish I had the time to sort it all out (Christmas holidays,
> hopefully!)
> Getting Win7 at reasonable cost isn't straight forward in
> Europe, thanks to meddling by politicians <sigh>, but that
> situation is improving.
>
> Best,
> --
> Rob (~52N, ~1W)
>
>
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: DeepSkyStacker@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:DeepSkyStacker%40yahoogroups.com>
> >[mailto:DeepSkyStacker@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:DeepSkyStacker%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of Sander Pool
> >Sent: 23 November 2009 13:58
> >To: DeepSkyStacker@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:DeepSkyStacker%40yahoogroups.com>
> >Subject: Re: [DeepSkyStacker] Re: Any chance 2010 will see DSS coded to
> >benefit from 3D accelerators? GPGPU / cGPU
> >
> >
> >You are running an i7 with a 32 bit OS? You must be one of the 5 people
> >on Earth that do that :) Slap 6GB or more in that machine, get 64 bit
> >Win7 and watch how much better your computer runs. Keep DSS and DSS-Live
> >running while processing your files in PixInsight or PS or whatever you
> >use. While having other sofware up as well.
> >
> >The main benefit of the 64bit OS is not the 64 bit apps but that you can
> >run lots of software at the same time because you can have lots of RAM.
> >
> >Anyway, you can get cheap XP Pro boxes online if you need to keep XP
> >around for legacy stuff (say around $100). I have one sitting outside by
> >the scope but other than that my Vista x64 machine runs everything I
> >need. I installed Win7 but haven't switched to it yet.
> >
> > Sander
> >
> >Hemmings, Rob K. wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Hi Luc,
> >>
> >> Great! I recently upgraded to an i7, which has given me the
> >> best DSS speed increase so far, with the 4 cores, but am still
> >> using XP-32. I will probably switch to Win7-64 as soon as
> >> you release that version! At the moment, my PC does too many
> >> things (it is also my TV & satellite receiver/recorder etc), so
> >> plan is to eventually move non-astro stuff to another system
> >> and have an astro-dedicated PC - maybe a Christmas present to
> >> myself! :o)
> >>
> >> Best Regards,
> >> --
> >> Rob (~52N, ~1W)
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >------------------------------------
> >
> >Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
>
>

Hi Luc,

the API to keep is eye on is OPENCL http://www.khronos.org/opencl/ . You
probably knew this already but I'm posting in case someone wants to
investigate how tough this would be. Yes, it would be difficult :)

I've been thinking of writing some OpenCL code for PixInsight but
frankly modern CPUs are so powerful and easy to program that it would
only be worth it for very time consuming tasks. Speeding up DSS isn't
really high on my list. I build pretty substantial stacks with close to
100 OSC frames (6 MP each) and it stacks it in maybe 15 minutes. I never
bother to really measure it though. It's batch processing and I simply
do something else while it's grinding away. On my i7-920 it's very very
fast.

Sander

g_day_1961 wrote:
>
>
> Folks,
>
> Hi all - I'm new here - first post an all. So let me start by saying
> how impressed I am with DSS - having used it for over a year.
>
> Now that I tend to have master darks, flats, dark flats, bias etc - I
> just have to stack sometimes 20 - 30 subs (1800 seconds typically) of
> my favourite shots. I notice things seem about 40% faster at least on
> Windows 7 (64 bit) than windows XP (64 bit).
>
> I'm using a quad core PC with 6GB RAM, and am delighted with how DSS
> makes use of those multi core chips.
>
> I ponder if there is any move to go further - optimising DSS for
> either General Purpose Graphics Processing Unit or Computational GPU
> load balancing / optimisation. Whilst leveraging a 4 core CPU is great
> - leveraging a 1,600 shader GPU might be beyond belief. Any chance
> this could be on the horizon - given how common and power programmable
> 3D graphics accelerators are these days?
>
> I guess it'd be a non-trivial port, still the speed up it would gain
> would be nice - I'd love to see stacking done in real time as opposed
> to taking 5 - 10 minutes!
>
> Many thanks - and clear skies all,
>
> Matthew
>
>

Just don't forget us peons with older XP machines. My only machine capable of
running DSS is a Celeron M based laptop with 1.25G of RAM and XP. Until, of
course, a Linux version ships.... hint hint

Rick

On November 23, 2009 10:02:26 Sander Pool wrote:
> Hi Rob,
>
> sorry to hear Win7 may be an expensive proposition for you. I got the
> $50 early upgrade when it was offered back in Sept (or whenever it was).
> I think an OEM copy (need to combine with hardware purchase) is around
> $100 for Win7 home ultimate. It's really quite a shame that pricing is
> so different across the pond.
>
> I think ultimately you'll find it worth your while though. My i7-920
> with 6GB positively flies. Naturally DSS runs no faster than on your
> system but being able to keep it and PI and Firefox (hog) and Excel
> running at the same time is very nice indeed.
>
> Sander
>
> Hemmings, Rob K. wrote:
> > Hi Sander,
> >
> > I agree with everything you say (I'm a computer pro) - just
> > wish I had the time to sort it all out (Christmas holidays,
> > hopefully!)
> > Getting Win7 at reasonable cost isn't straight forward in
> > Europe, thanks to meddling by politicians <sigh>, but that
> > situation is improving.
> >
> > Best,
> > --
> > Rob (~52N, ~1W)
> >
> > >-----Original Message-----
> > >From: DeepSkyStacker@yahoogroups.com
> >
> > <mailto:DeepSkyStacker%40yahoogroups.com>
> >
> > >[mailto:DeepSkyStacker@yahoogroups.com
> >
> > <mailto:DeepSkyStacker%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of Sander Pool
> >
> > >Sent: 23 November 2009 13:58
> > >To: DeepSkyStacker@yahoogroups.com
> >
> > <mailto:DeepSkyStacker%40yahoogroups.com>
> >
> > >Subject: Re: [DeepSkyStacker] Re: Any chance 2010 will see DSS coded to
> > >benefit from 3D accelerators? GPGPU / cGPU
> > >
> > >
> > >You are running an i7 with a 32 bit OS? You must be one of the 5 people
> > >on Earth that do that :) Slap 6GB or more in that machine, get 64 bit
> > >Win7 and watch how much better your computer runs. Keep DSS and DSS-Live
> > >running while processing your files in PixInsight or PS or whatever you
> > >use. While having other sofware up as well.
> > >
> > >The main benefit of the 64bit OS is not the 64 bit apps but that you can
> > >run lots of software at the same time because you can have lots of RAM.
> > >
> > >Anyway, you can get cheap XP Pro boxes online if you need to keep XP
> > >around for legacy stuff (say around $100). I have one sitting outside by
> > >the scope but other than that my Vista x64 machine runs everything I
> > >need. I installed Win7 but haven't switched to it yet.
> > >
> > > Sander
> > >
> > >Hemmings, Rob K. wrote:
> > >> Hi Luc,
> > >>
> > >> Great! I recently upgraded to an i7, which has given me the
> > >> best DSS speed increase so far, with the 4 cores, but am still
> > >> using XP-32. I will probably switch to Win7-64 as soon as
> > >> you release that version! At the moment, my PC does too many
> > >> things (it is also my TV & satellite receiver/recorder etc), so
> > >> plan is to eventually move non-astro stuff to another system
> > >> and have an astro-dedicated PC - maybe a Christmas present to
> > >> myself! :o)
> > >>
> > >> Best Regards,
> > >> --
> > >> Rob (~52N, ~1W)
> > >
> > >------------------------------------
> > >
> > >Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

I don't think DSS has a time bomb so whatever runs now will keep working.

     Sander

Rick Saunders wrote:
> Just don't forget us peons with older XP machines. My only machine capable of
> running DSS is a Celeron M based laptop with 1.25G of RAM and XP. Until, of
> course, a Linux version ships.... hint hint
>
> Rick
>
>
>

Hi Rick,

> Just don't forget us peons with older XP machines. My only machine
> capable of running DSS is a Celeron M based laptop with 1.25G of
> RAM and XP.

No problem here for quite a long time.
The only thing that can happen is when I will decide to drop XP support, you
will not have the benefit of new features and new camera support.


> Until, of course, a Linux version ships.... hint hint
Don't even think about it. ;>

I don't have the resources to support more than one OS, and I don't believe in
Linux for the desktop (never have) except for a niche market.

On one hand we have a nice 92+% market share, and on the other hand a very small
3% share.

Clear skies,
Luc

--- In DeepSkyStacker@yahoogroups.com, Rick Saunders <ozzzy@...> wrote:
>
> Just don't forget us peons with older XP machines. My only machine capable of
> running DSS is a Celeron M based laptop with 1.25G of RAM and XP. Until, of
> course, a Linux version ships.... hint hint
>
> Rick

Would still appreciate some help on dark processing.
Cleverly, I went to the DSS website and found the help on darks, etc.  The
information given is, I'm sure, technically accurate, but doesn't appear to
answer my question.
My Nikon D70 clearly has issues with amp glow and noise -- but its what I have
got to work with.
I read the following about "maximum":
"Maximum
This is and ultra simple method which should be use with a lot of care. The
maximum value of all the pixels in the stack is computed for each pixel.
It may be useful to find what is wrong in a stack by exhibiting all the defects
of all the calibrated images."
Well, I need a more aggressive method than median to get rid of my amp glow, but
"maximum" produces some pretty ugly artifacts on my images. So, is there any way
to tell, except by trial and error, which of the other methods (Kappa Sigma
Clipping, Median Kappa Sigma Clipping, Auto Adaptive Weighted Average, or
Entropy Weighted Average) is more aggressive than median and less than maximum?

Thanks
   Pieter Strauss


--- In DeepSkyStacker@yahoogroups.com, "Pieter Strauss" <pieters@...> wrote:
>
> Josh,
>   Thanks for the suggestion.  However, no matter how many darks I have, I
still wouldn't know the meaning of the various parms on the darks window, nor
how to use them. I'm sure the info is around somewhere, I just haven't been able
to find it.
>
> Regards,
>   Pieter Strauss
>
> --- In DeepSkyStacker@yahoogroups.com, Josh Hufford <joshhufford@> wrote:
> >
> > One suggestion I would make, use a LOT more darks, and make sure the
> > temperature matches your lights as closely as possible. I would try and get
> > at least 50 each of your calibration frames.
> >
> > Josh
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 1:02 PM, Pieter Strauss <pieters@> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > My Nikon D70 produces pretty fierce amp glow. When I use the default DSS
> > > parms (median), the amp glow is not sufficiently reduced. When I picked
(out
> > > of a hat): maximum, hot pixels, dark optimization, the subtraction is a
bit
> > > too aggressive, and you can see where the amp glow has been removed in the
> > > final image (when stretched in PS).
> > >
> > > I have other choices here, but don't know how to use them: Kappa Sigma,
> > > Median Kappa Sigma, auto-adaptive weighted average, a parm for Kappa, a
> > > number of iterations for sigma, and auto adaptive weighted average. Also
> > > dark multiplication factor.
> > >
> > > Any clues would be appreciated.
> > >
> > > Problem set: 10 4 minute subs of M15, 5 4 minute darks, Nikon D70 imaging
> > > on LX90, guided by DSI on TMB80 SS. Stacked in DSS, stretched in PS.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Pieter Strauss
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>

Hi Pieter,

   Well, if I have my ducks all in a row... If you take 100 M&M's and drop them
onto the table they will spred out and make kind of like a buckshot pattern.
Lets say that they all stayed on the table top but we are going to draw a circle
one foot in diamater centered were we dropped them. Now we go around and pick up
all the M&M's outside of the circle. With Kappa Sigma Clipping we eat the ones
we picked up. With Median Kappa Sigma we put the ones we picked up into the
center of the circle. I do not know how the other two methods work.

Fly with Pegasus
Len


   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Pieter Strauss
   To: DeepSkyStacker@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Monday, November 23, 2009 1:30 PM
   Subject: [DeepSkyStacker] Re: need info on dark processing



   Would still appreciate some help on dark processing.
   Cleverly, I went to the DSS website and found the help on darks, etc. The
information given is, I'm sure, technically accurate, but doesn't appear to
answer my question.
   My Nikon D70 clearly has issues with amp glow and noise -- but its what I have
got to work with.
   I read the following about "maximum":
   "Maximum
   This is and ultra simple method which should be use with a lot of care. The
maximum value of all the pixels in the stack is computed for each pixel.
   It may be useful to find what is wrong in a stack by exhibiting all the
defects of all the calibrated images."
   Well, I need a more aggressive method than median to get rid of my amp glow,
but "maximum" produces some pretty ugly artifacts on my images. So, is there any
way to tell, except by trial and error, which of the other methods (Kappa Sigma
Clipping, Median Kappa Sigma Clipping, Auto Adaptive Weighted Average, or
Entropy Weighted Average) is more aggressive than median and less than maximum?

   Thanks
   Pieter Strauss





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

Hi Len,

With Median Kappa Sigma, you put back the one outside the circle at the median
position in the circle.

With Maximum, you don't draw a circle, you eat all the M&Ms but the one at the
farthest position.

With Adaptive Weighted Average...you can't use M&Ms.
Each M&Ms is weighted relatively to the average position. The closer the
weighter.

Anyway, whatever the method the goal is to eliminate some and keep the others
then average them.

You can't get more aggressive than median (a single value represents them all).

And BTW, getting rid of all the amp glow is near to impossible since the amp
glow is evolving with time so a single master dark can not contain the amp glow
for all the light frame.
You can try to use Dark Optimization because it's designed to separate the amp
glow from the rest of the dark signal and subtract both from each light frame
using different weights.

However it's not perfect especially if the amp glow is weak or with nebula
images where the nebula and the amp glow are difficult to tell apart.

Hope it helps a little.

Clear skies,
Luc

--- In DeepSkyStacker@yahoogroups.com, <wardlr@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Pieter,
>
>   Well, if I have my ducks all in a row... If you take 100 M&M's and drop them
onto the table they will spred out and make kind of like a buckshot pattern.
Lets say that they all stayed on the table top but we are going to draw a circle
one foot in diamater centered were we dropped them. Now we go around and pick up
all the M&M's outside of the circle. With Kappa Sigma Clipping we eat the ones
we picked up. With Median Kappa Sigma we put the ones we picked up into the
center of the circle. I do not know how the other two methods work.
>
> Fly with Pegasus
> Len
>

I am trying to use the File Groups feature of DSS and am having trouble with a
Master Dark being created instead of allowing each group to operate on its own
Lights and Darks.  Here is what I am doing:

1. I put 8 Lights in the Main Group, 6 in Group 1, and 5 in Group 2.
2. I put 6 Darks in the Main Group, 6 in Group 1, and 6 in Group 2.

After I have done this, I click on 'Recommendation...' and it states that 'You
are creating a master dark from 18 dark frame(s)'

I am trying to get the darks from each group to only operate on the group they
are in as is described in the 'Technical Info' under 'File Groups'.

Is there something I am doing wrong?  I am using version 3.2.2 of DSS.  Any help
would be appreciated.  Thank you.

Doug

Hi Doug,

The message in the Recommended Settings is a little off base.
It should be something like "you are creating master darks from 18 dark
frame(s)".

You will really end up with a 3 master darks, one for the main group, one for
the Group 1 and one for Group 2.

Know, however, that if the master dark in the main group is better suited for
some light frames in either Group 1 and 2 it can be used.
The content of the Main Group can be used by any light frame.
The content of any other group can be used only by light frames in the same
group.

Clear skies,
Luc

--- In DeepSkyStacker@yahoogroups.com, "sdholland777" <sdholland777@...> wrote:
>
> I am trying to use the File Groups feature of DSS and am having trouble with a
Master Dark being created instead of allowing each group to operate on its own
Lights and Darks.  Here is what I am doing:
>
> 1. I put 8 Lights in the Main Group, 6 in Group 1, and 5 in Group 2.
> 2. I put 6 Darks in the Main Group, 6 in Group 1, and 6 in Group 2.
>
> After I have done this, I click on 'Recommendation...' and it states that 'You
are creating a master dark from 18 dark frame(s)'
>
> I am trying to get the darks from each group to only operate on the group they
are in as is described in the 'Technical Info' under 'File Groups'.
>
> Is there something I am doing wrong?  I am using version 3.2.2 of DSS.  Any
help would be appreciated.  Thank you.
>
> Doug
>

i've got a set of files which will cause DSS 3.2.2 to crash when trying to
median stack; average stacking works okay. no darks,flats or bias frames, just 7
fits files. i think it will crash on as few as 3 of them.

do you think this is a similar bug? shall i send these files or wait until you
have debugged this crash?

rob

--- In DeepSkyStacker@yahoogroups.com, "deepskystacker" <deepskystacker@...>
wrote:
>
> Hi Josh,
>
> Crash confirmed.
>
> I am looking into it.
>
> Thanks,
> Luc
>
> --- In DeepSkyStacker@yahoogroups.com, Josh Hufford <joshhufford@> wrote:
> >
> > Here is the link to the file list,
> >
> > http://dl.dropbox.com/u/3131618/Clear%20list.txt
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 4:53 PM, Sander Pool <sander_pool@> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Hi Josh,
> > >
> > > did you also include your dssfilelist? It may be needed for debugging.
> > >
> > > Sander
> > >
> > > ibanezguiness777 wrote:
> > > >
> > > > For some reason when I try to stack any of these files it will cause
> > > > version 3.2.2 to crash, but it will not cause the previous version to
> > > > crash. I have tried several different settings with the same results.
> > > > I will register the images just fine, then compute the offsets, but
> > > > when it gets to the point of stacking the first image DSS crashes.
> > > > Here is a zip file of two light frames, if you need more files please
> > > > let me know, two was enough to crash the program on my system. Any
> > > > ideas???
> > > >
> > > > Thanks! Josh
> > > >
> > > > http://dl.dropbox.com/u/3131618/Stepans%20Quintet.zip
> > > > <http://dl.dropbox.com/u/3131618/Stepans%20Quintet.zip>
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>

Hi Rob,

I suppose it is similar especially if you are using 32 bit float fits files.

Clear skies,
Luc

--- In DeepSkyStacker@yahoogroups.com, "pfile" <yahoo@...> wrote:
>
>
> i've got a set of files which will cause DSS 3.2.2 to crash when trying to
median stack; average stacking works okay. no darks,flats or bias frames, just 7
fits files. i think it will crash on as few as 3 of them.
>
> do you think this is a similar bug? shall i send these files or wait until you
have debugged this crash?
>
> rob
>

Luc,
      Thank you for the clarification and the quick response.  And thanks for
supplying this very useful product.

                                    Doug

--- In DeepSkyStacker@yahoogroups.com, "deepskystacker" <deepskystacker@...>
wrote:
>
> Hi Doug,
>
> The message in the Recommended Settings is a little off base.
> It should be something like "you are creating master darks from 18 dark
frame(s)".
>
> You will really end up with a 3 master darks, one for the main group, one for
the Group 1 and one for Group 2.
>
> Know, however, that if the master dark in the main group is better suited for
some light frames in either Group 1 and 2 it can be used.
> The content of the Main Group can be used by any light frame.
> The content of any other group can be used only by light frames in the same
group.
>
> Clear skies,
> Luc
>
> --- In DeepSkyStacker@yahoogroups.com, "sdholland777" <sdholland777@> wrote:
> >
> > I am trying to use the File Groups feature of DSS and am having trouble with
a Master Dark being created instead of allowing each group to operate on its own
Lights and Darks.  Here is what I am doing:
> >
> > 1. I put 8 Lights in the Main Group, 6 in Group 1, and 5 in Group 2.
> > 2. I put 6 Darks in the Main Group, 6 in Group 1, and 6 in Group 2.
> >
> > After I have done this, I click on 'Recommendation...' and it states that
'You are creating a master dark from 18 dark frame(s)'
> >
> > I am trying to get the darks from each group to only operate on the group
they are in as is described in the 'Technical Info' under 'File Groups'.
> >
> > Is there something I am doing wrong?  I am using version 3.2.2 of DSS.  Any
help would be appreciated.  Thank you.
> >
> > Doug
> >
>

Luc,

Thanks!  I don't see any open standard from NVidia or ATI, but I do understand
each will comply with Microsoft's Directx 11 DirectCompute

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DirectCompute

This will probably be the enforced standard for 99% of folk other then heavy
duty specialists that code directly for one or the other vendor's high end cards
natively.

I remember seeing a Finish Youtube video of a high end PC with 4 way SLI doing
(near) real time X-ray tomography (i.e. under 10 seconds) for a task that used
to take 8 hours one a big rig computer - which was impressive to say the least. 
I ponder will 2010 be the year of the GPU as a massively powerful co-processor -
time will tell.  Till then

Clear skies,

    Matthew


--- In DeepSkyStacker@yahoogroups.com, Sander Pool <sander_pool@...> wrote:
>
>
> Hi Luc,
>
> the API to keep is eye on is OPENCL http://www.khronos.org/opencl/ . You
> probably knew this already but I'm posting in case someone wants to
> investigate how tough this would be. Yes, it would be difficult :)
>
> I've been thinking of writing some OpenCL code for PixInsight but
> frankly modern CPUs are so powerful and easy to program that it would
> only be worth it for very time consuming tasks. Speeding up DSS isn't
> really high on my list. I build pretty substantial stacks with close to
> 100 OSC frames (6 MP each) and it stacks it in maybe 15 minutes. I never
> bother to really measure it though. It's batch processing and I simply
> do something else while it's grinding away. On my i7-920 it's very very
> fast.
>
> Sander
>
> g_day_1961 wrote:
> >
> >
> > Folks,
> >
> > Hi all - I'm new here - first post an all. So let me start by saying
> > how impressed I am with DSS - having used it for over a year.
> >
> > Now that I tend to have master darks, flats, dark flats, bias etc - I
> > just have to stack sometimes 20 - 30 subs (1800 seconds typically) of
> > my favourite shots. I notice things seem about 40% faster at least on
> > Windows 7 (64 bit) than windows XP (64 bit).
> >
> > I'm using a quad core PC with 6GB RAM, and am delighted with how DSS
> > makes use of those multi core chips.
> >
> > I ponder if there is any move to go further - optimising DSS for
> > either General Purpose Graphics Processing Unit or Computational GPU
> > load balancing / optimisation. Whilst leveraging a 4 core CPU is great
> > - leveraging a 1,600 shader GPU might be beyond belief. Any chance
> > this could be on the horizon - given how common and power programmable
> > 3D graphics accelerators are these days?
> >
> > I guess it'd be a non-trivial port, still the speed up it would gain
> > would be nice - I'd love to see stacking done in real time as opposed
> > to taking 5 - 10 minutes!
> >
> > Many thanks - and clear skies all,
> >
> > Matthew
> >
> >
>

yes, they are 32bit float fits. looking forward to a fix, thanks.

rob


--- In DeepSkyStacker@yahoogroups.com, "deepskystacker" <deepskystacker@...>
wrote:
>
> Hi Rob,
>
> I suppose it is similar especially if you are using 32 bit float fits files.
>
> Clear skies,
> Luc
>
> --- In DeepSkyStacker@yahoogroups.com, "pfile" <yahoo@> wrote:
> >
> >
> > i've got a set of files which will cause DSS 3.2.2 to crash when trying to
median stack; average stacking works okay. no darks,flats or bias frames, just 7
fits files. i think it will crash on as few as 3 of them.
> >
> > do you think this is a similar bug? shall i send these files or wait until
you have debugged this crash?
> >
> > rob
> >
>

Luc (and Len),
   Many thanks.  I will work with this and see how well I can do.  Am sad that
there is no way to make all the amp glow go away.
   The M&M metaphor is a bit obscure for me, but I will think it over and see if
enlightenment occurs.
   Thanks again,

   CS and quiet images!
      Pieter Strauss

--- In DeepSkyStacker@yahoogroups.com, "deepskystacker" <deepskystacker@...>
wrote:
>
> Hi Len,
>
> With Median Kappa Sigma, you put back the one outside the circle at the median
position in the circle.
>
> With Maximum, you don't draw a circle, you eat all the M&Ms but the one at the
farthest position.
>
> With Adaptive Weighted Average...you can't use M&Ms.
> Each M&Ms is weighted relatively to the average position. The closer the
weighter.
>
> Anyway, whatever the method the goal is to eliminate some and keep the others
then average them.
>
> You can't get more aggressive than median (a single value represents them
all).
>
> And BTW, getting rid of all the amp glow is near to impossible since the amp
glow is evolving with time so a single master dark can not contain the amp glow
for all the light frame.
> You can try to use Dark Optimization because it's designed to separate the amp
glow from the rest of the dark signal and subtract both from each light frame
using different weights.
>
> However it's not perfect especially if the amp glow is weak or with nebula
images where the nebula and the amp glow are difficult to tell apart.
>
> Hope it helps a little.
>
> Clear skies,
> Luc
>
> --- In DeepSkyStacker@yahoogroups.com, <wardlr@> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Pieter,
> >
> >   Well, if I have my ducks all in a row... If you take 100 M&M's and drop
them onto the table they will spred out and make kind of like a buckshot
pattern. Lets say that they all stayed on the table top but we are going to draw
a circle one foot in diamater centered were we dropped them. Now we go around
and pick up all the M&M's outside of the circle. With Kappa Sigma Clipping we
eat the ones we picked up. With Median Kappa Sigma we put the ones we picked up
into the center of the circle. I do not know how the other two methods work.
> >
> > Fly with Pegasus
> > Len
> >
>

Luc,
Only kidding about Linux... Windows is fine =)

Rick

Hi Matthew,

> Thanks!  I don't see any open standard from NVidia or ATI, but I do
> understand each will comply with Microsoft's Directx 11
> DirectCompute

It sure has more standardization potential than the remote possibility that
NVidia and AMD/ATI creating something common.

It will work only with Vista and Win7 though. One more reason to switch to 7 :)

Clear skies,
Luc


--- In DeepSkyStacker@yahoogroups.com, "g_day_1961" <mowglhi@...> wrote:
>
>
> Luc,
>
> Thanks!  I don't see any open standard from NVidia or ATI, but I do understand
each will comply with Microsoft's Directx 11 DirectCompute
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DirectCompute
>
> This will probably be the enforced standard for 99% of folk other then heavy
duty specialists that code directly for one or the other vendor's high end cards
natively.
>
> I remember seeing a Finish Youtube video of a high end PC with 4 way SLI doing
(near) real time X-ray tomography (i.e. under 10 seconds) for a task that used
to take 8 hours one a big rig computer - which was impressive to say the least. 
I ponder will 2010 be the year of the GPU as a massively powerful co-processor -
time will tell.  Till then
>
> Clear skies,
>
>    Matthew

I love using Deepskystacker as I find that for my type of use it is just the
best. I want to use deep sky stacker live to stack images of galaxies on the fly
as I take them. This works fairly well but of course as each series is stacked
and saved it overwrites the last file. Would it be possible to incrementally
number these files instead of overwritining them? This would make it easier to
accumulate shots of galaxies to look for supernova which is my main aim rather
than accumulating files for a pretty picture. No offense to other
astrophotographers.

And thanks again!  I have worked with the new understanding you have given me,
and am getting better images.  I think I was trying to get DSS to remove noise
which was inherent in my raw images.
DSS is a godsend -- I was getting really tired of manually stacking in PS.
CS
   Pieter Strauss

--- In DeepSkyStacker@yahoogroups.com, "Pieter Strauss" <pieters@...> wrote:
>
> Luc (and Len),
>   Many thanks.  I will work with this and see how well I can do.  Am sad that
there is no way to make all the amp glow go away.
>   The M&M metaphor is a bit obscure for me, but I will think it over and see
if enlightenment occurs.
>   Thanks again,
>
>   CS and quiet images!
>      Pieter Strauss
>
> --- In DeepSkyStacker@yahoogroups.com, "deepskystacker" <deepskystacker@>
wrote:
> >
> > Hi Len,
> >
> > With Median Kappa Sigma, you put back the one outside the circle at the
median position in the circle.
> >
> > With Maximum, you don't draw a circle, you eat all the M&Ms but the one at
the farthest position.
> >
> > With Adaptive Weighted Average...you can't use M&Ms.
> > Each M&Ms is weighted relatively to the average position. The closer the
weighter.
> >
> > Anyway, whatever the method the goal is to eliminate some and keep the
others then average them.
> >
> > You can't get more aggressive than median (a single value represents them
all).
> >
> > And BTW, getting rid of all the amp glow is near to impossible since the amp
glow is evolving with time so a single master dark can not contain the amp glow
for all the light frame.
> > You can try to use Dark Optimization because it's designed to separate the
amp glow from the rest of the dark signal and subtract both from each light
frame using different weights.
> >
> > However it's not perfect especially if the amp glow is weak or with nebula
images where the nebula and the amp glow are difficult to tell apart.
> >
> > Hope it helps a little.
> >
> > Clear skies,
> > Luc
> >
> > --- In DeepSkyStacker@yahoogroups.com, <wardlr@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Pieter,
> > >
> > >   Well, if I have my ducks all in a row... If you take 100 M&M's and drop
them onto the table they will spred out and make kind of like a buckshot
pattern. Lets say that they all stayed on the table top but we are going to draw
a circle one foot in diamater centered were we dropped them. Now we go around
and pick up all the M&M's outside of the circle. With Kappa Sigma Clipping we
eat the ones we picked up. With Median Kappa Sigma we put the ones we picked up
into the center of the circle. I do not know how the other two methods work.
> > >
> > > Fly with Pegasus
> > > Len
> > >
> >
>

Hi Allan,

It is possible. I am putting this in the todo list.

Clear skies,
Luc

--- In DeepSkyStacker@yahoogroups.com, "allangould" <allan.gould@...> wrote:
>
> I love using Deepskystacker as I find that for my type of use it is just the
best. I want to use deep sky stacker live to stack images of galaxies on the fly
as I take them. This works fairly well but of course as each series is stacked
and saved it overwrites the last file. Would it be possible to incrementally
number these files instead of overwritining them? This would make it easier to
accumulate shots of galaxies to look for supernova which is my main aim rather
than accumulating files for a pretty picture. No offense to other
astrophotographers.
>

Hi,

I thought DDS live would stack my incoming dark images (not DSOs BTW) and
luminosity would increase
as a result but it is not the case ...

Instead I have this error message in the log for each new image :
"L'image C:\....\40D DSS LIVE\IMG_0019.JPG n'est pas empilable (Aucune
transformation trouvée depuis
l'image de référence)" ?

A plain live stack mode which would just stack (originals are very dark !)
images to slowly increase
global luminosity, without any average or star search or registration, etc...
done but running very
fast would be very interesting !

BR
Sylvain

Hi Sylvain,

Stacking is never improving brightness. It is just improving signal to noise
ratio.
That's the case with DSS and DSS Live.

If DSS Live tells you that it can't find a transformation it probably means that
not enough stars were detected (or none at all if you are trying with non DSO
images).

If you want to stack images (non DSO) you can use DSS and use the No Alignment
transformation. This is the only one not using stars (at least since 3.3.2).

Clear skies,
Luc

--- In DeepSkyStacker@yahoogroups.com, sweiller <sweiller@...> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I thought DDS live would stack my incoming dark images (not DSOs BTW) and
luminosity would increase
> as a result but it is not the case ...
>
> Instead I have this error message in the log for each new image :
> "L'image C:\....\40D DSS LIVE\IMG_0019.JPG n'est pas empilable (Aucune
transformation trouvée depuis
> l'image de référence)" ?
>
> A plain live stack mode which would just stack (originals are very dark !)
images to slowly increase
> global luminosity, without any average or star search or registration, etc...
done but running very
> fast would be very interesting !
>
> BR
> Sylvain
>

Thanks for that Luc and thanks for such a great program. Absolutely brilliant.
Allan

--- In DeepSkyStacker@yahoogroups.com, "deepskystacker" <deepskystacker@...>
wrote:
>
> Hi Allan,
>
> It is possible. I am putting this in the todo list.
>
> Clear skies,
> Luc
>
> --- In DeepSkyStacker@yahoogroups.com, "allangould" <allan.gould@> wrote:
> >
> > I love using Deepskystacker as I find that for my type of use it is just the
best. I want to use deep sky stacker live to stack images of galaxies on the fly
as I take them. This works fairly well but of course as each series is stacked
and saved it overwrites the last file. Would it be possible to incrementally
number these files instead of overwritining them? This would make it easier to
accumulate shots of galaxies to look for supernova which is my main aim rather
than accumulating files for a pretty picture. No offense to other
astrophotographers.
> >
>

Luc,
Would it be possible to have a box where stacking was additive rather than
averaging? This may give some an idea of how the final picture will look with
stretching after normal staking with DSS.
Regards, Allan

--- In DeepSkyStacker@yahoogroups.com, "deepskystacker" <deepskystacker@...>
wrote:
>
> Hi Sylvain,
>
> Stacking is never improving brightness. It is just improving signal to noise
ratio.
> That's the case with DSS and DSS Live.
>
> If DSS Live tells you that it can't find a transformation it probably means
that not enough stars were detected (or none at all if you are trying with non
DSO images).
>
> If you want to stack images (non DSO) you can use DSS and use the No Alignment
transformation. This is the only one not using stars (at least since 3.3.2).
>
> Clear skies,
> Luc
>
> --- In DeepSkyStacker@yahoogroups.com, sweiller <sweiller@> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I thought DDS live would stack my incoming dark images (not DSOs BTW) and
luminosity would increase
> > as a result but it is not the case ...
> >
> > Instead I have this error message in the log for each new image :
> > "L'image C:\....\40D DSS LIVE\IMG_0019.JPG n'est pas empilable (Aucune
transformation trouvée depuis
> > l'image de référence)" ?
> >
> > A plain live stack mode which would just stack (originals are very dark !)
images to slowly increase
> > global luminosity, without any average or star search or registration,
etc... done but running very
> > fast would be very interesting !
> >
> > BR
> > Sylvain
> >
>

There is no difference between adding and averaging. SNR is identical as
long as there's no overflow.

DSS-L has a convenient (if small) slider to adjust black/white/mid
points. Try those.

     Sander

allangould wrote:
>
>
> Luc,
> Would it be possible to have a box where stacking was additive rather
> than averaging? This may give some an idea of how the final picture
> will look with stretching after normal staking with DSS.
> Regards, Allan
>
> -
>
>
>

Hi Luck,

Ok sorry ! Stacking is not the correct word to use ...

I should have said co-adding !

The goal is the following : doing what sophisticated video cameras (eg.
Irondack) produce when
showing the sky almost live to an assistance by adding up to 255 frames to
generate an image much
brighter than a single one !

DSS live could maybe have such a mode : all the images in the watched dir (say 5
or 10s exposures),
would have their luminosity added together,  as quickly as possible, image after
image. This would
permit to use the DSLR as a sort of integrating camera. It would be great to
show DSOs to a public
assistance with only a little waiting time.

For what I can see as programming work it should be a rather easy mode to
implement : just eliminate
all the sophisticated commun functions of DSS and co-add  in a 16 or 32 bit
buffer and show the
result (with, why not a user contrast, Lum, gamma) ?

What do you think of that ?

BR

Sylvain

deepskystacker a écrit :
>
>
> Hi Sylvain,
>
> Stacking is never improving brightness. It is just improving signal to
> noise ratio.
> That's the case with DSS and DSS Live.

Hi,

adding and averaging are statistically identical. DSS-L already does
what you want to do. The benefit of averaging over adding is that once
you've adjusted your black/mid/white sliders you do not need to
re-adjust them as additional images come in. If the data was added you
need to keep adjusting to keep the image from blowing out.

What integrating video cameras do is keep the sensors collecting light
for more than a single frame, then shift the contents into a buffer
that's used to generate a video image. That's not quite the same as
averaging or adding individual frames.

     Sander

sweiller wrote:
> Hi Luck,
>
> Ok sorry ! Stacking is not the correct word to use ...
>
> I should have said co-adding !
>
> The goal is the following : doing what sophisticated video cameras (eg.
Irondack) produce when
> showing the sky almost live to an assistance by adding up to 255 frames to
generate an image much
> brighter than a single one !
>
> DSS live could maybe have such a mode : all the images in the watched dir (say
5 or 10s exposures),
> would have their luminosity added together,  as quickly as possible, image
after image. This would
> permit to use the DSLR as a sort of integrating camera. It would be great to
show DSOs to a public
> assistance with only a little waiting time.
>
> For what I can see as programming work it should be a rather easy mode to
implement : just eliminate
> all the sophisticated commun functions of DSS and co-add  in a 16 or 32 bit
buffer and show the
> result (with, why not a user contrast, Lum, gamma) ?
>
> What do you think of that ?
>
> BR
>
> Sylvain
>
>
>

Hi Sylvain,

I think that the way it is already done is better than adding a co-adding option
which has more limitations (the maximum number of added frames) and no benefit
that I can see.

Indeed, using the slider (top-right above the image) you are modifying the
overall brightness using a non linear curve bringing more details than any
linear addition will ever be able to.

If you want more flexibility, DSS is not (and will not) be the software to use
during post processing.

I am sorry or maybe I am missing something, but, aside from seeing the benefit
of it, I don't see how I can squeeze this kind of feature without utterly
modifying DSS user interface.

Clear skies,
Luc

--- In DeepSkyStacker@yahoogroups.com, sweiller <sweiller@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Luck,
>
> Ok sorry ! Stacking is not the correct word to use ...
>
> I should have said co-adding !
>
> The goal is the following : doing what sophisticated video cameras (eg.
Irondack) produce when
> showing the sky almost live to an assistance by adding up to 255 frames to
generate an image much
> brighter than a single one !
>
> DSS live could maybe have such a mode : all the images in the watched dir (say
5 or 10s exposures),
> would have their luminosity added together,  as quickly as possible, image
after image. This would
> permit to use the DSLR as a sort of integrating camera. It would be great to
show DSOs to a public
> assistance with only a little waiting time.
>
> For what I can see as programming work it should be a rather easy mode to
implement : just eliminate
> all the sophisticated commun functions of DSS and co-add  in a 16 or 32 bit
buffer and show the
> result (with, why not a user contrast, Lum, gamma) ?
>
> What do you think of that ?
>
> BR
>
> Sylvain
>

Hi Luc and all,

Ok I see  what you mean and and will test the process with averaging asap
(weather)!
Somebody did it already ?

BR

Sylvain

deepskystacker a écrit :
>
>
> Hi Sylvain,
>
> I think that the way it is already done is better than adding a
> co-adding option which has more limitations (the maximum number of added
> frames) and no benefit that I can see.
>
> Indeed, using the slider (top-right above the image) you are modifying
> the overall brightness using a non linear curve bringing more details
> than any linear addition will ever be able to.
> .....