Pattern subtraction scripts

Hi,

Thank you so much for adding the GUI!

I'm currently writing an article for the website describing the scripts. I also made some improvements to the code and corrected some bugs. With a bit of luck it won't affect too much the GUI related code.

I'll upload my new code as soon as posible.


Thank you again.
Best regards,
Vicent.
 
Hi all!

Vincent, I recently added the UIs for your scripts (as Gerald and Franz told) and had to modify your scripts to open and execute the configuration dialog.

I added the UI to my github-account open for public use: LDD_UI.jsh and LPS_UI.jsh

My repository on github: https://github.com/chkettu/pi-repository

Please let me know, if I can help you to integrate the UI into the newly modified / reworked scripts.

Best,
Chris.
 
Vicent,

Just wanted to thank you for this incredibly useful script.  I just switched to a used FLI Microline 16803 which is a great CCD except for the obvious vertical pattern defects, especially a prominent one almost dead center in the chip.  It was a painstaking chore to fix this by conventional methods but the scripts cure the defects without a hitch.  I simply created a master defect map and now apply it to every sub image to clean them to near perfection.

Thanks so much for this and all your other great work.  It is highly appreciated.

Best,

Jim
 
Following on from dgruber’s comment, I have recently started using iTelescope and have noticed the vertical defect lines in my images. Previously this has not been an issue for me imaging at home with my own equipment and so I have only become aware of these scripts in recent days.

For the iTelescope images I have to hand, the two scripts do an ok job of removing the lines at default settings, however, when I then register and integrate the .lps calibrated subs it becomes clear that not all column defects were identified and removed.

Using LDD at sigma 3 rather than the default of 5 improves but doesn’t eliminate all lines. Pushing sigma lower has no material effect. So this has got me wondering whether more subs are needed to aid detection within the unregistered integrated stack of calibrated subs. Currently I have 24 x 300 second subs in H-alpha, would this be considered enough?
 
Hughsie,
T8 at iteleskope with its FL 16803 showed a mass of vertical lines in my images.
With LDD and LPS i got them fully removed and not visible in the stronly stretched stack.
For LDD i used the parm: layer to remove 9, Rejection limit 3, Detection threshold entire 5, partial 5, Image Shift 50
For LPS i used the parm: layer to remove 9, Rejection limit 3, Global rejection, Global r limit 5 and Background ref 0 0 512 512

The more images to stack for the LDD Input the better. One image as input for LDD did not work as good.

Gerald
 
Thank you Gerald. I imagined that ‘more data was better’ given that the LDD worked on the basis of an unregistered and integrated image of all subs. Imagining in Ha no doubt compounds the issue too. More subs are coming from T14 at the next New Moon.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top