How does your Work-flow looks like?

[Rutgerbus]

Hi all,

I'm interested in the way you work with your dataset to get the best out of it.

I'm aware of the fact that there are several processing softwares out there. I'm using DSS, Fitswork and Lightroom, but you also have Nebulosity and the top notch Pixsinsight.

For DSS there are nice tutorials written and I didn't find it hard to understand (pretty straight forward, although some settings I don't understand and therefore not using them). Fitswork is a German program and there's not much to find about it on the Internet. I learned some basic stuff, but I'm sure it can do much more (deconvolution, debayer etc. etc.) Then you have Nebulosity and Pixinsight which are both software packages were you have to pay for (€70-90). But for what I have seen and red about it it's the top notch software available. But it has such a steep learning curve that it keeps me away of trying it out (30 day trial version of PI is available for download for free)

So for now I stick to DSS, Fitswork and Ligtroom and this is how my normal work-flow looks like.

1) Take lights (and in my case I skip the darks, flats and biased most of the time since I'm lazy, shouldn't do that I know)

2)Stack the lights in DSS and save the outcome as a .Tif (non processed that is)

3)Open the .Tif in Fitswork and start processing (background extraction, stretching, make stars smaller, unsharp mask and sometimes noise reduction. Save the file as .Tif.

4) Open the file in Ligtroom and adjust to taste.

So basically when I have around 80-100 lights, it takes me about 40-50 minutes to get my final Astrophoto.

I wonder how your work-flow looks like, maybe we can learn from each other.

 

[jforkner]

My workflow is: DSS (FITS) > StarTools (TIF) > Photoshop CS6. For me, darks, flats, & bias makes a big difference.

Jack

 

[rnclark]

See:
http://www.clarkvision.com/articles/astrophotography.image.processing2/

and in the section Try it Yourself is a link to the discussion here on dpreview.

Roger

 

[W5JCK]

Speaking of being lazy, I'll over simplify my workflow:

For stacking into single image:

Nebulosity --> CS6. I use lights and flats, but no darks.

Note: I save the Nebulosity file(s) as 16-bit uncompressed TIF.

For creating a time lapse shot on static mount that freezes the stars in place:

1. Nebulosity to align and save each file. No stacking. Lights only.
2. Convert Nebulosity FITs to TIFs with XnConvert.
3. Load converted TIFs into LR 6, make adjustments and crop.
4. Export JPEGs from LR 6.
5. Compile JPEGs into time lapse video using Time Lapse Assembler.
6. Refine video in iMovie. Optional.

--
Jack Swinden
W5JCK, amateur radio operator
An astrophotography hobbyist and amateur radio instructor and examiner. Sony a7 and Sony a6000. https://www.flickr.com/photos/jackswinden/albums

 

[dswtan]

My "serious" (don't laugh!) workflow for non-snapshots is:

- Capture lights, darks, flats with modified Canon DSLR.
- Import everything into Lightroom and convert to DNG (my habitual non-astro flow).
- DSS on the DNGs, default settings unless it's a comet.
- Import resulting TIF into Lightroom.
- Mess with curves manually to try to get a decent result.
- Muck with clarity, vibrance, saturation, contrast and other sliders to get something nice.
- Export as JPG for web.

I sometimes play with the ProDigital Astronomy Tools plug-ins in Photoshop, but apart from the gradient removal, I usually find it's not very effective for me. I don't tend to use Photoshop on my astro photos in general, much preferring Lightroom's simplicity. (I have never understood Layers; mental block or something.)

I have looked at Nebulosity and quickly got lost compared to my current flow, so gave up.

I have the PixInsight evaluation download, but it is as daunting as everyone says and the clock is almost out. What's worse is the *tutorials* are daunting. I could not find a really basic soup-to-nuts tutorial in written form -- it's all videos. I don't like/have time for videos. Some people are book-learners (me; word-centric) and some are video-learners (visual/auditory). Hands-on would probably work well for me, but I don't know someone local yet for that.

I have Roger Clark's site on my to-do list but requires study time since his pages are long.

I have the Astropix DVD by Jerry Lodriguss, which I quite liked but not sure if I'm following any methods there at this point.

Best results I get currently are at:

Loading…

www.flickr.com

 

[rnclark]

My "serious" (don't laugh!) workflow for non-snapshots is:

• Capture lights, darks, flats with modified Canon DSLR.
• Import everything into Lightroom and convert to DNG (my habitual non-astro flow).
• DSS on the DNGs, default settings unless it's a comet.

Note you have a technical problem with this work flow.
In lightroom the conversion to DNG applies a tone curve.
The application of a flat field correction is then done on tone curve data so will lead to errors. The tone curve is linear at low intensities so dark subtraction still works well with tone curve data. But the flat field data are higher signals so is warped by the variable gamma function of the tone curve.

You can fix this problem a couple of ways. If you are using profiled lenses, then in Lightroom apply the lens profile in the raw converter and it corrects the light fall-off on the linear data before the tone curve is applied. If using non-profiled lenses, or a telescope, use Adobe's tool to create a lens profile, then apply it.

And of course, the 3rd way is switch to traditional linear processing.

Roger

 

[dswtan]

dswtan wrote:
My "serious" (don't laugh!) workflow for non-snapshots is:

Note you have a technical problem with this work flow.

Thanks Roger! I'll review this and give it a shot. It is true I have been having mixed experiences with gradient removal.