Cosmetic correction, CFA and DSLR RAW settings

[magnusl]

Hi all!

I'm being cofused over DSLR RAW settings and the CFA checkbox in the cosmetic correction process.

I have a set of lights, taken over a period of over one month. I have calibrated them after taking them, so calibration has also been extended over a period of over a month.

I just now realized that my DSLR RAW format setting was not set to "Pure Raw", so I am a bit uncertain as to with what setting the lights have been calibrated.

Now, in trying to combine these subs, I'm doing cosmetic correction on them. Now it looks as they react differently to the CFA checkbox:
- some subs work nicely with the CFA checbox checked.
- other subes seems to need the checkbox to be un-checked. Some subs also seems to react very negatively to CC, depending on the status of the CFA checkbox.

Now, my suspicion is that I might have combined subs with different DSLR RAW settings. So I might need to recalibrate them all. However, a few experiments with this has this far not shown any consistent pattern in the reactions to the CC procss and CFA settings there.

So: is there a way for me to see with what DSLR RAW format settings a certain sub has been calibrated? And could anyone clarify the relationship between the CFA checkbox and the DSLR RAW format settings, I'd be happy....

Two calibrated subs, reacting differently to the CFA checkbox are uploaded to:

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/fs744ujp8oed79d/AACfnztnt-E98N8km8Tv2dUBa?dl=0


Magnus

[bulrichl]

Hi Magnus,

So: is there a way for me to see with what DSLR RAW format settings a certain sub has been calibrated? And could anyone clarify the relationship between the CFA checkbox and the DSLR RAW format settings, I'd be happy....

no, currently the information about the DSLR_RAW setting at the time of the raw conversion process is not saved in the Metadata of an XISF file.
Concerning the CFA setting in the CosmeticCorrection process: if you apply CC to NOT debayered images, CFA must be checked, else not.

I had a look at your images and wonder why your images don't contain the following Fits keywords:
- "PROGRAM": PixInsight version
- "COMMENT": information about PixInsight Class Library
- "COMMENT": information about FITS module version
- "COMMENT": information about which PixInsight version was used for decoding
- "COMMENT": information about which DSLR_RAW module was used for decoding
- "COMMENT": information about which dcraw version was used for decoding

XISF files of my DSLR images contain these informations. Did you decode the Canon raw files before processing them with PixInsight?

Bernd

[magnusl]

Thanks, it clarifies! So the CFA setting does not depend on how I've set the Raw format settings, then.

Now, both my uploaded subs are before debayering. But they behave very differently to the CFA checkbox - for one, bad pixels seems to be removed when it is checked, for the other not. Based on my previewing them. Do you see this as well?

The FITS keywords: Hrm. The cr2-files are converted by Ekos. I capture and they are saved as fits. So I enter these fits into Pixinsight, then to be transformed to xisf in the calibration process. Does that make sense? And is there a benefit from saving as cr2, rather than fits? (I belive this is doable).

Magnus