StarTools

Hi,

I'm a new user of StarTools (1.4 alpha).

[*]A link to my starting image is: https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=8 ... file%2cfit
[*]A link to my final StarTools image is: https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=8 ... oto%2ctiff

My work flow for processing was (followingIvo's tutorial at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqm4mB2TKN0):

• AutoDev
  Crop (actually skipped this step because the starting image was already cropped)
  Wipe
  AutoDev
  Deconvolution
  Sharp
  HDR
  Color
  Track
  Denoise following Track disable

I would appreciate some pointers on how to improve the result. I'm especially disappointed with the background which looked much better during the temporary AutoDev in Wipe.

Thanks for your time,
--jim

Hi Jim
i had a quick try at you data and below is my result and workflow
i think autodev just overdid it on your image. For me, contrary to Ivo's advice, I prefer to use develop instead of autodev. I seem to get better results and have more control that way. I might be able to do better if I devoted more time to this image, but for a quick one, I think it came out pretty good.

Che
File loaded [C:\Users\Che\Desktop\integration(4,10)_cropped_DBE.fit].
---
--- Crop
Parameter [X1] set to [74 pixels]
Parameter [Y1] set to [66 pixels]
Parameter [X2] set to [2889 pixels (-78)]
Parameter [Y2] set to [1930 pixels (-56)]
--- Wipe
Parameter [Mode] set to [Correct Color & Brightness]
Parameter [UNKNOWN] set to [Yes]
Parameter [Precision] set to [256 x 256 pixels]
Parameter [Dark Anomaly Filter] set to [1 pixels]
Parameter [Drop Off Point] set to [100 %]
Parameter [Corner Aggressiveness] set to [100 %]
Parameter [Aggressiveness] set to [75 %]
--- Develop
Parameter [White Calibration] set to [Use Stars]
Parameter [Gamma] set to [1.00]
Parameter [Skyglow] set to [0 %]
Parameter [Digital Development] set to [96.00 %]
Parameter [Blue Luminance Contrib.] set to [100 %]
Parameter [Green Luminance Contrib.] set to [100 %]
Parameter [Red Luminance Contrib.] set to [100 %]
Parameter [Dark Anomaly Headroom] set to [5 %]
Parameter [Dark Anomaly Filter] set to [Off]
--- Deconvolution
Parameter [Image Type] set to [Deep Space]
Parameter [Mask Behavior] set to [De-ring Mask Gaps, Hide Result]
Parameter [Radius] set to [1.9 pixels]
Parameter [Iterations] set to [6]
Parameter [Regularization] set to [1.00 (optimal noise and detail)]
Parameter [Mask Fuzz] set to [8.0 pixels]
--- Wavelet Sharpen
Parameter [Intelligent Enhance] set to [Yes]
Parameter [Scale 1] set to [100 %]
Parameter [Scale 2] set to [100 %]
Parameter [Scale 3] set to [100 %]
Parameter [Scale 4] set to [100 %]
Parameter [Scale 5] set to [100 %]
Parameter [Mask Fuzz] set to [8.0 pixels]
Parameter [Amount] set to [100 %]
Parameter [Small Detail Bias] set to [75 %]
--- HDR
Parameter [Small Detail Precision] set to [Max]
Parameter [Channels] set to [Brightness Only]
Parameter [Algorithm] set to [Reveal DSO Core]
Parameter [Dark/Bright Response] set to [Full]
Parameter [Detail Size Range] set to [140 pixels]
Parameter [Noise Suppression] set to [Off]
Undo.
Redo.
--- Color
Parameter [Cap Green] set to [No]
Parameter [Bias Slider Mode] set to [Sliders Reduce Color Bias]
Parameter [Style] set to [Scientific (Color Constancy)]
Parameter [LRGB Method Emulation] set to [RGB Ratio, CIELab Luminance Retention]
Parameter [Dark Saturation] set to [2.00]
Parameter [Bright Saturation] set to [Full]
Parameter [Saturation Amount] set to [239 %]
Parameter [Blue Bias Reduce] set to [1.00]
Parameter [Green Bias Reduce] set to [1.47]
Parameter [Red Bias Reduce] set to [1.66]
Parameter [Mask Fuzz] set to [1.0 pixels]
--- Wavelet De-Noise
Parameter [Scale 1] set to [90 %]
Parameter [Scale 2] set to [90 %]
Parameter [Scale 3] set to [90 %]
Parameter [Scale 4] set to [90 %]
Parameter [Scale 5] set to [0 %]
Parameter [Mask Fuzz] set to [1.0 pixels]
Parameter [Scale Correlation] set to [3]
Parameter [Color Detail Loss] set to [12 %]
Parameter [Brightness Detail Loss] set to [12 %]
Parameter [Grain Size] set to [5.3 pixels]
Parameter [Read Noise Compensation] set to [Off]
Parameter [Smoothness] set to [75 %]
--- Magic
Parameter [Mode] set to [Shrink]
Parameter [Mask Grow] set to [1 pixels]
Parameter [Iterations] set to [2 pixels]
File saved [C:\Users\Che\Desktop\integration(4,10)_cropped_DBE.jpg].

Cheman wrote:Hi Jim
i had a quick try at you data and below is my result and workflow
i think autodev just overdid it on your image. For me, contrary to Ivo's advice, I prefer to use develop instead of autodev. I seem to get better results and have more control that way. I might be able to do better if I devoted more time to this image, but for a quick one, I think it came out pretty good.

Thanks for taking the time to process my data and for posting your workflow.

As you suggested, I started to experiment more with Develop and AutoDev and now get much better end results. At the moment, I'm getting better results by very carefully choosing the region of interest (RoI) in AutoDev, but I need to spend more time with Develop.

I now realize I need to pay more attention to image background appearance in the Develop/AutoDev stage; I mistakenly assumed this would be handled by the Denoise module.

Thanks again.

You know, the background does get handled in the denoise step. It is just that if you have developed so that there is heavy background noise, there is a background that is not too dark, but it is quite smooth. That means that you can open it for example in photoshop and apply a curve to darken it, leaving the interesting parts as they where. Another way is to use the life/isolate to mask out the background. In your image, as you can see from the above processing it is not actually necessary to make the background "bright", so you don't have to do these steps, while in other cases e.g. a nebula that is not much above your noise floor which you are trying to bring out, you might have to increase the background brightness as well, so isolate or a curve at the end is something you might want to consider.
As an example I processed your image making it brighter than Che at the autodev stage - which is not actually the best for this particular image, you lose a bit of contrast in the core compared to Che's image, but it should serve for the demonstration - and then used isolate to bring it out, making the background darker: As for autodev/develop, I find that if you play with the ROI in autodev you can get the desired result without resorting to develop. Plus Ivo says it is "smarter", so he should know something about that and thus should be a good idea to try autodev first...

ecuador wrote:You know, the background does get handled in the denoise step. It is just that if you have developed so that there is heavy background noise, there is a background that is not too dark, but it is quite smooth. That means that you can open it for example in photoshop and apply a curve to darken it, leaving the interesting parts as they where. Another way is to use the life/isolate to mask out the background. In your image, as you can see from the above processing it is not actually necessary to make the background "bright", so you don't have to do these steps, while in other cases e.g. a nebula that is not much above your noise floor which you are trying to bring out, you might have to increase the background brightness as well, so isolate or a curve at the end is something you might want to consider.
As an example I processed your image making it brighter than Che at the autodev stage - which is not actually the best for this particular image, you lose a bit of contrast in the core compared to Che's image, but it should serve for the demonstration - and then used isolate to bring it out, making the background darker:

As for autodev/develop, I find that if you play with the ROI in autodev you can get the desired result without resorting to develop. Plus Ivo says it is "smarter", so he should know something about that and thus should be a good idea to try autodev first...

Thanks for providing this feedback and for taking the time to process my data.