There is a long, more painful way of doing this in Photoshop, but it’s very time-consuming and the steps are way beyond the scope of this article.For many years I have been using Deep Sky Stacker to align and stack my short exposure frames to give the result of a longer exposure. There are several free programs for Windows, but I’m not personally aware of any available for Mac. Next comes the process of stacking the individual frames.They both have the ability to treat the sky and any foreground separately – great for wide angle night landscapes. The former is only available for the Mac and the latter for Windows. More recently, two new stacking programs have become available Starry Landscape Stacker (~£38.99) and Sequator (free, but a contribution by paypal for a cup of coffee or two is suggested).Clever.Lynkeos Often, a better image can be obtained by digitally 'stacking' or combining several shorter duration photos on a Mac/PC rather seeking to obtain one long duration photo. As a result, the stars within the sky will be sharp as will be the foreground. The programs will then stack the sky area accounting for the movement of the stars across the sky but stack the foreground with no movement. The sky area is selected leaving the foreground unselected.The D610 was controlled over a USB cable from an Android tablet using the program qDslrDashboard and took 56, 20 second, exposures at an ISO of 800. The raw frames had been taken using a full frame Nikon D610 attached to a CFF Telescope’s 127 mm apochromat refractor employing an aspherical oil-spaced triplet objective. Starry Sky Stacker reduces noise in pictures of the night sky that are captured as a sequence of exposures using an equatorial mount or some other mechanism that ensures that stars move very little either during or between exposures.I currently do not have any wide angle data to try out, but decided to test Sequator with a set of Nikon raw files that I have extensively tried out with Deep Sky Stacker.
Star Stacking Program Free Programs ForI was not using a field flattener, but the stellar images were perfect across the unvignetted field of view.Astrophotography: Star Photo Stacking: Ever wondered how people take those amazing photos of the night sky, filled with nebulae, galaxies and all sort of impressive sights Well, you dont need the Hubble telescope for a great photo of the night sky. As a result, the field was significantly vignetted but the two clusters were well covered. The telescope has a 3-inch focuser but, having a 2-inch barrel, could not be expected to cover the full frame sensor. This could possibly be that Raw Therapee uses a more sophisticated de-Bayering algorithm or that Deep Sky Stacker overexposes them when processing the raw files so increasing their size and reducing their saturation. NEF raw files in Deep Sky Stacker and that the star images were somewhat tighter. I discovered that the result when stacking the Tiff files derived by Raw Therapee gave a far better colour to the bright blue stars within the cluster than that derived directly from the. It could be well worth reading this article. NEF raw files were first converted into Tiff files. Microsoft office for mac free download full version 2010It is also far faster: for this set of 56, full frame, raw files, Sequator took just over 2 minutes using my i7 laptop whereas Deep Sky Stacker took over 13 minutes.The Sequator opening screen has a set of commands at its left which should be applied downwards in turn. There is no need, for example, to first set the star detection threshold. It has a very simple interface and is far easier to use by beginners. The ‘High dynamic range’ option tries to prevent parts of the image ‘blowing out’ so helping to preserves the star colours and does a great job of suppressing the significant light pollution that is within the frames.The Sequator manual ( ) gives a description of all the stacking options. I suggest that you try these out with a small number of frames to see what suits your data best. For a stack like this, there is no need to specify a reference frame with Sequator selecting one from the middle of the stack itself.Perhaps surprisingly, before the aligning and stacking takes place one needs to select the name of the resulting Tiff file and the location into which it is to be placed.There are various stacking options, for example, the ‘Remove dynamic noise’ mode will attempt to eliminate hot pixels. ![]() In contrast, the complete Sequator process took just over 2 minutes. I found no obvious difference between this and the result from stacking the raw files and so assume Sequator is using a quality de-Bayering algorithm.Though I was able to achieve a similar result when stacking Tiff files in Deep Sky Stacker, it took a few minutes to derive the Tiff files and then 13 minutes to align and stack them. I was disappointed that, in both cases, the colour of the red giants, very obvious in a single frame, had not been retained.To bring out their colour, I first produced an enhanced image of the brightest stars in the image derived from a single frame.I then ‘added’ this image into the main image using the ‘Screen’ Blending mode to give the final (cropped) result.I also used Sequator to stack the Raw Tharapee derived Tiff files.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorLake ArchivesCategories |