WBPP registration vs StarAlignment process

[flyeye]

Recently I have found out that WBPP registration left many frames behind, it did not registered it by some reason.
I tried to align debyered calibrated images left by WBPP with standard StarAlignment process. And it successfully aligned all images, no warning, no errors. With default paramaters!

So, I thinks I should talk with authors of WBPP. May be some of them read this thread?
Or somebody knows how to reach them?

[lucam]

This was true of the old BPP script as well. Somehow, the default registration parameters in BPP/WBPP are not the same as in StarAlignment and fail at aligning images that, while usually of worse quality, pose no trouble to StarAlignment. If anyone has investigated the parameters and has any suggestion how to tune the registration step in WBPP/BPP, it would be greatly appreciated.

[flyeye]

It looks like its simple enough. In WBPP script, in file WeightedBatchPreprocessing-engine.js on the lines from 1269 we have initialization of the StarDetector. And parameters are used here differs sufficiantly from the default parameters of the StarAlignment process:

   let starDetector = new StarDetector();
   starDetector.structureLayers = 4; // default - 5
   starDetector.noiseLayers = 2; // default - 0

This means that some stars will be exclused because of size and many others - with noise.
Usually I also adjust Maximum distortion (0.35-0.5) and Peak response (0.8-0.9).

So, the question is how to switch off checksum control of scripts in PI (its not allowed to use modifued script) or how to re-register modified script...
Trying to find out...

But for sure it will be better to add these parameters on the WBPP dialog.

[flyeye]

Hm... No, this part belongs to weight estimation only. Star alignment goes goes later...
Try to find tomorrow..

[flyeye]

WBPP script uses StarAlignment module/class, initialization is on the line 2048 and next line further (and only there), almost all parameters are default. But some of these default parameters are different from the default parameters as we can see in StarAligment process (e.g. useTriangles). Unfortunately, I can`t find source code of StarAligment in GitLab repository, probably it has completely another name or integrated into another module, or into PixInsight core... Without source code subsequent analisys is very complicated. May be I`ll be make another attempt later.

[flyeye]

Made one more test recently. I thought, what if I would increase peakResponse to 0.95 and decrease maxStarDistortion to 0.3 ?? StarAlignment initializtation? StarAlignment could detect more stars, more putitive pairs... Yes, it finds. Twice more in my certain case. But it does not help at all. Abosutely the same result.

[flyeye]

Actually, I`m in the dead end. There is no option "Apply" in Registration section. If it fails during registration. calulated weight estimation simply dropping. There are no way to calculate weights and does not make registration...

[flyeye]

OOOOOOk! I found the check box "Compute weights after registration" and now I can move further... How I miss it? So, its not a dead end, sorry. After Subframe weitghting I will do everything manually.

But would be very to have Apply button in Registration section also, like in Integration section.

[flyeye]

Actually, it would be much streight forward to have an option Write weights to debayerd/calibrated files (in section Subframes weighting) and another - Write weights to aligned files in section Registration. Both checked by default.