Re: #APCC Pro 1.9 w/ASTAP platesolve test always fails #APCC

Sébastien Doré

Thanks for the educative insights, Dale and Ray.

It is true that feature is probably not « necessary ». ASTAP is able to solve my subs after all. But while not « horrific » (and definitely not roasting, freezing is much more a concern at my place), my system f-ratio (F10) / FL (2132) with an image scale of 0,42 ‘’/px is « challenging », I’d say. My exposure time with this system is 15s at ISO 3200 which I found to be the sweet spot relative to exposure + solving time. And the very reason I ticked the box in the first place was to try shorter (5-10s) exposure times without burying the signal in noise and hence still be able to solve quickly (which I obviously haven’t been able to do yet). As I setup / tear down each night, I’m trying to save as much time as possible building a model.

One might argue that the new DEC-ark modeling alone will save me much more time in comparison to all-sky that I should not worry about the 5-10s/point savings, and it is a fair point. But since I have never use modeling before (freshly new AP mount user), from my standpoint, that additionnal step (modeling) is one more thing to account for in my planning, so I’m trying to mitigate its impact as much as possible...

Anyway, just exposing my need/situation here, so take it for what it is. Definitely not criticizing your work guys. Really happy to see so much integration between platforms (re NINA, AP ecosystem, ASTAP) and the way you take into account what users are reporting (when relevant)!

FWIW, if AP’s feature request platform would be up and running ;-), I’d vote FOR the option to specify/use a master dark as Dale suggested.

Clear skies!

Join to automatically receive all group messages.