STEVE333 wrote: ↑Mon Sep 19, 2022 4:17 amThanks for the feedback Jim. I think they just had an update to WBPP so maybe they fixed the "star cores" problem. I didn't see any trace of it in my WBPP Drizzled images for large or small or dim or bright stars. I really like how it makes the stars look more realistic and not pixelated.Juno16 wrote: ↑Mon Sep 19, 2022 2:03 am
Grouping keywords are better described in this PI release announcement (6-2-21) https://pixinsight.com/forum/index.php? ... sed.16638/.
Also,you mentioned using drizzle in WBPP. It is surprising simple, but I did have some issues with star cores.
In the release notes linked above, in the section “What's new: Main Features in Summary”, I used saw this:
“rangeClipHigh is now disabled in ImageIntegration: solving the questioned black pixels issue in the drizzled images”
Not finding a selection for “clip high” in WBPP, I just used the ImageIntegration (ClipHigh unchecked) and DrizzleIntegration processes on the registered images. That cured the issue with the star cores in the drizzled image.
I had tried the manual drizzle process before, but quit because the extra processing time and file size wasn’t worth it to me.
After recently using WBPP to process up to registration, it’s no big deal running the ImageIntegration and DrizzleIntegration processes afterward. I need to work out a file management routine to lessen the impact of the extra disk space.
To me, the much improved stars is worth it.
Steve
Thanks Steve. I did the update before running WBPP. I believe the version is 2.5.3?
I will have to look into it more, but it is really not a big deal to run a few extra processes. I will do more reading.
Either way, yes, the stars are beautiful and drizzling (2x) will now be part of my workflow when I am using the Sharpstar.
Thanks for your feedback sir!
