Telescope Live Other · Abdul Thomas Jnr · ... · 20 · 476 · 4

or you make a copy from one of them and do stacking as usual

andrea tasselli:
If they are single files then by definition they can't be stacked. They can and should be calibrated, however. If they are 2 then they can can be averaged together with pixelmath.

Timothy Prospero:

Abdul Thomas Jnr:
Hi guys. I have a trial with telescope live but the files are not stacked and have to do the stacking ourselves with the calibration frames. I've just tried to stack on WBPP but that can't stack less than 3 light frames per filter. If you have used telescope live before how do you stack your individual filter light frames?

*These three files are likely already calibrated RGB (SHO) lights. You simply need to combine them according to the filter used, whether it's RGB or narrowband (NB), and then process them as usual. Of course, you can also process the individual files first and combine them later if you prefer...no need to stack nor calibrate..

Timothy Prospero:

Abdul Thomas Jnr:

Timothy Prospero:

Abdul Thomas Jnr:
Hi guys. I have a trial with telescope live but the files are not stacked and have to do the stacking ourselves with the calibration frames. I've just tried to stack on WBPP but that can't stack less than 3 light frames per filter. If you have used telescope live before how do you stack your individual filter light frames?

*These three files are likely already calibrated RGB (SHO) lights. You simply need to combine them according to the filter used, whether it's RGB or narrowband (NB), and then process them as usual. Of course, you can also process the individual files first and combine them later if you prefer...no need to stack nor calibrate..

*** But how come you get 2 to 4 images per filter? And ive just taken 1 file off each channel and did rgb combination and the result looked washed like it hasn't been stacked or calibrated***

I'm not sure if you are allowed, by Telescope.live,  can y share those files? Which type are those ones, like  Ha+LRGB?

Nik Szymanek:
Hi Abdul.

All of the data available from Telescope Live will have been calibrated although you do have the option to download both the uncalibrated data and the relevant calibration frames. It's very unlikely that you'll need to do any calibration yourself as the calibrated files will have been quality checked before being made available.

Also, all of the datasets that are available should consist of many sub-exposures per filter (in some cases LOTS of them as the datasets are continuously updated allowing very high quality images to be produced). 

Stacking just one sub-exposure per RGB or SHO filter will produce a low-signal washed-out image but adding just three or four per filter will improved things dramatically. If your Telescope Live trial permits, try downloading additional datasets and stacking them. You'll see a a huge difference.

Hope this helps.

Regards,

Nik Szymanek

Nik Szymanek:
Hi Abdul.

I ran a couple of Telescope Live datasets using WBPP and they both completed with no problems. The Astrometric Solution was also successful. I've attached a screen grab of the WBPP parameters I used for this.



I agree that, once combined, the small dataset master frames do look a bit lacklustre (left). I ran a similar small dataset in Astro Pixel Processor and it came out much more as I would have expected (right). I presume that there may be some tweaks required in WBPP to correct this but once again I'm a novice with WBPP so hopefully the PixInsight experts can help!



Hope this helps.

Nik

George Hatfield:
I've processed a number of Telescope.live images.  At the least expensive subscription level, calibration data is not available, but then all the subs are calibrated when you download them, so it really is not needed.  However, it is important to run CosmeticCorrection to remove bad pixels and, in the case of images from the older CCD cameras, bad columns.  This is easy to do with WBPP.  Typically, I run CC, registration, and integration using WBPP.  This process yields good-quality masters that can then be used to create an RGB.  

I have found that the best data is from the CHI-1 system (Planewave CDK24).  Some of the data from smaller scopes (e.g., Takahashi FSQ106) have very distorted stars along the edges of images.  Chromatic dispersion is also sometimes a problem.  However, many of these defects can now be corrected by running the latest version of BlurXterminator (2.0.0, AI4).   The improvement is amazing, to say the least.  I no longer have to restrict my interest to images from the CDK24.

Another problem with using the "one-click observations" is that you might only get 2 subs per filter, which makes it difficult to remove satellite tracks and other similar issues.  Integration is also problematic with just 2 subs, but one can always get around that problem by adding two copies.  Now, I normally download at least three of these bundles for a given object, so I have a minimum of 6 subs per filter.  The very reasonable price of these bundles makes this practice affordable, and the resulting masters are of much better quality.   They also have bundles of one-click observations that can provide hours of data.  Of course, the cost is higher, but for me OK for an occasional indulgence.  

George