Drizzle vs Non-Drizzle (PixInsight)

Discuss how you are able to get those fantastic images!!!
Post Reply
User avatar
STEVE333 United States of America
Inter-Galactic Ambassador
Articles: 0
Offline
Posts: 3466
Joined: Sat May 11, 2019 5:01 pm
4
Location: Santa Cruz, Ca, USA
Status:
Offline

TSS Awards Badges

TSS Photo of the Day

Drizzle vs Non-Drizzle (PixInsight)

#1

Post by STEVE333 »


This post shows the comparison of how stars look with my setup when processing is carried out with standard integration and then with 2X Drizzle integration. I tried to duplicate the processing as best I could. The Camera/Telescope Image Scale is 2.25 arc-sec/pixel which causes small stars to be pixelated and/or square. David (Jockinireland) recently discussed how Drizzle Integration made his stars look much better. So, I decided to give it a try on my most recent image. The two comparisons below show the stars with normal integration (no Drizzle) in the left panes and the stars with 2X Drizzle Integration in the right panes. Two locations with different backgrounds are shown to demonstrate the results. The difference is quite obvious with the Drizzle integration stars looking much improved and more realistic. The nebulae details looked very similar for the two approaches (at least to my eyes).
The Drizzle files are approximately 3X larger than the non-Drizzle files. StarXTerminator took about 25 minutes to remove stars on a drizzled image and just over 5 min on a non-drizzled image. Just FYI.

Drizzle Comparison.jpg
Drizzle Comparison 2.jpg

Hope this is useful.

Steve
Steve King: Light Pollution (Bortle 5)
Telescope + Mount + Guiding: W.O. Star71-ii + iOptron CEM40 EC + Orion Magnificent Mini AutoGuider
Camera: ASI 1600MM Pro + EFW Filter Wheel + Chroma 3nm Siii, Ha, Oiii + ZWO LRGB Filters
Software: PHD2; APT; PixInsight ***** My AP website: www.steveking.pictures
Image
Image
User avatar
Juno16 United States of America
Universal Ambassador
Articles: 0
Offline
Posts: 8195
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 3:13 pm
4
Location: Mississippi Gulf Coast
Status:
Offline

TSS Awards Badges

TSS Photo of the Day

Re: Drizzle vs Non-Drizzle (PixInsight)

#2

Post by Juno16 »


Thanks Steve. Exactly my results too (maybe a bit more pixelated in my non-drizzled data at my 2.7 arcsec/px image scale).

I had tried drizzle before, but at that time, the extra work, time, and disk space wasn't worth it to me. After using Drizzle in the new WBPP, I found it to work beautifully without much fuss. Of course, the processing time is longer and the file size is larger, but the beautiful stars are definitely worth it!

I did, however, get better star cores by taking the registered lights from WBPP and Running them through the Image Integration and Drizzle Integration processes separately from WBPP. No big deal!

You are definitely right about the longer processing times for StarXTerminator. I started using the new AI 11, but switched to the AI 11 Lite version. It still takes quite a while!
Jim

Scopes: Explore Scientific ED102 APO, Sharpstar 61 EDPH II APO, Samyang 135 F2 (still on the Nikon).
Mount: Skywatcher HEQ5 Pro with Rowan Belt Mod
Stuff: ASI EAF Focus Motor (x2), Orion 50mm Guide Scope, ZWO 30 mm Guide Scope, ASI 220mm min, ASI 120mm mini, Stellarview 0.8 FR/FF, Sharpstar 0.8 FR/FF, Mele Overloock 3C.
Camera/Filters/Software: ASI 533 mc pro, ASI 120mm mini, Orion SSAG, IDAS LPS D-1, Optolong L-Enhance, ZWO UV/IR Cut, N.I.N.A., Green Swamp Server, PHD2, Adobe Photoshop CC, Pixinsight.
Dog and best bud: Jack
Sky: Bortle 6-7
My Astrobin: https://www.astrobin.com/users/Juno16/
User avatar
bobharmony
Local Group Ambassador
Articles: 0
Offline
Posts: 2028
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 1:11 pm
4
Location: Connecticut, US
Status:
Offline

TSS Photo of the Day

Re: Drizzle vs Non-Drizzle (PixInsight)

#3

Post by bobharmony »


Not only are the drizzled stars rounder, they also appear a touch brighter to my eye. The nebulosity looks slightly smoother with better defined boundaries in the drizzled images to me.

I haven't had to drizzle as I am typically oversampled with 1.2 arcsec image scale and seeing at 2.0 arcsec at its best. I tried some small targets (like M1) a few years back with DSS drizzle but haven't done anything like that since.

Bob
Hardware: Celestron C6-N w/ Advanced GTmount, Baader MK iii CC, Orion ST-80, Canon 60D (unmodded), Nikon D5300 (modded), Orion SSAG
Software: BYE, APT, PHD2, DSS, PhotoShop CC 2020, StarTools, Cartes du Ciel, AstroTortilla

Image
User avatar
STEVE333 United States of America
Inter-Galactic Ambassador
Articles: 0
Offline
Posts: 3466
Joined: Sat May 11, 2019 5:01 pm
4
Location: Santa Cruz, Ca, USA
Status:
Offline

TSS Awards Badges

TSS Photo of the Day

Re: Drizzle vs Non-Drizzle (PixInsight)

#4

Post by STEVE333 »


You are correct Bob. I did a little star reduction on the original image. When I processed the Drizzle image I tried to match the original processing, but, it didn't come out exactly the same. The stars were a bit dimmer in the reprocess, so, I didn't need to do any star reduction on them. The net result was that the star reduced stars in the original image ended up a bit dimmer than the stars in the Drizzle processed image. The difference in brightness isn't related to the Drizzle processing. Sorry for the confusion.

Steve
Steve King: Light Pollution (Bortle 5)
Telescope + Mount + Guiding: W.O. Star71-ii + iOptron CEM40 EC + Orion Magnificent Mini AutoGuider
Camera: ASI 1600MM Pro + EFW Filter Wheel + Chroma 3nm Siii, Ha, Oiii + ZWO LRGB Filters
Software: PHD2; APT; PixInsight ***** My AP website: www.steveking.pictures
Image
Image
Post Reply

Create an account or sign in to join the discussion

You need to be a member in order to post a reply

Create an account

Not a member? register to join our community
Members can start their own topics & subscribe to topics
It’s free and only takes a minute

Register

Sign in

Return to “Image processing”