The ground could have shifted, causing the error. I found this to be the case in SW NM on hard desert dirt.

Yanzhe, Contact me directly at email address below. I’m sure that it is a simple solution. Regards, George George Whitney Astro-Physics, Inc. Phone: 815-222-6538 (direct

I've played around with Topaz. I got acceptable results by not giving it free reign. I'd make an original and a Topaz'd layer in PS and brush in the Topaz'd layer with varying levels of opacity to

I am - i'm a longtime user of topaz and topaz AI. They can be really good, but generally for me they tend to be a bit heavy-handed, especially the denoise algorithms. I find Topaz clarity and detail

Are you familiar with Topaz noise reduction and sharpening? It works wonders on some things, especially the DeNoise. It is available standalone or as a PS plugin. Robert

Yeah it's interesting to see how processing techniques are evolving. Starnet was a curiosity a couple years ago, and now it's front and center! Brian -- Brian Brian Valente portfolio

I agree. I meant that my method of masking out the target for processing, leaving the stars and background alone, does not work on extended nebula and large galaxies. I am excited for the

Hi Robert >>>For extended nebula or large galaxies this does not work. i think it works exceptionally well for extended nebulas, where enhancing the nebulosity without hurting the stars can really

Thanks. This sounds like a very useful tool. As you all know, destruction of the stars is so easy with all the processes we do to make our pretty pictures. Around a small target in Photoshop I can

Starnet only works on stretched images and is now part of regular PixInsight distribution The "starmask" version produces a color version of the stars, which is good for blending back, but this

Thanks Glenn. I will check out the application. I’ve been lazy and not downloaded the newer version of Pixinsight. Wouldn’t the star mask only be a gray representation of where the stars were and

The process of covering and uncovering my equipment combined with ground movements, +/- tripod dynamics (it’s a Berlebach) changes my PA every night. Once I correct the PA each night my model works

I often leave my equipment set up over multiple nights when the weather is favorable (as it is right now). I always do a quick polar alignment and redo mapping each night. I don’t know if this is

Something is changing day over day that is enough to invalidate the mount model. You could try fixing the PA before each run and see if that has any effect. Maybe something is getting disturbed when

I'm seeking advice on a multiple night mobile workflow to reuse an APCC/APPM pointing/tracking model created on the first for subsequent nights. Here are my observations from the most recent new

I forgot to mention that once you have a starless image, you can import it into Photoshop and do whatever you want with it. Best, Glenn

Thank you, Robert. The process called Starnet+, which is also integrated into PixInsight, does not automatically produce a separate image with the stars that were just removed. However, doing so is

I keep a pair of nitrile gloves in my equipment box and slip one on my right hand to get a bit more grip on the knob when removing the telescope. I've always been able to release the knobs wearing

I intended to have a lot more Ha and OIII added to my M27 but that did not work. I would take a lot of OSC subs, I like to take at least 4-5 hours. With your filter you will probably get much more

Hi Robert, The image turned out pretty good. I want to image this nebula as well and I also have a 2600 color camera that I use a quad band narrow filter with. Now, I have a good image to compare