Re: Bad X scale?


 

I had some good luck this afternoon following the hints below and writing my own set of options for the solve-field program that drives ANSVR.

I set my own values for field width to 25 min and 100 max which covers the range of my two telescopes. Then I found that it actually runs really quickly with the --guess-scale option, since SGP does a pretty good job of populating the FITS file with pixel data.

The root of my problem appears to be that I needed many more index files for smaller fields of view. The recommendation I had overlooked (or didn't understand) on the index downloader was "20% of your smallest field." After adding about three more layers of indexes, it appears that all of my failed solves from last night run pretty quickly.

When I was solving plates from the Traveler, I actually had about the right set of indexes on hand. On moving to the long AP180, I find that I need a lot more of the smaller field of view indexes.

Thanks so much for the hints and tips!

Mojo

On 7/12/2020 1:35 PM, Worsel via groups.io wrote:
Mojo

For ANSVR, the most important factor is setting the field of view.  For other solvers, like ASTAP, there are other factors, but I use ANSVR almost exclusively; although ASTAP may be faster.  Search the forum for ASTAP or plate solve.

Here is my entry in the Additional Solve-field arguments      --no-plots --scale-low 40 --scale-high 90 --scale-units arcminwidth


Bryan


Join main@ap-gto.groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.