WBPP 2.5.0 Released

[Minusman]

It is CFA data that I use. So it only works with data from monochrome cameras? Since I do not need me why it is always skipped.

 

[ShedAstro]

Hi @ShedAstro,

would you like to share the log file of a failed run? this would help to investigate the issue.

Robyx

Not really as have no idea what one is or how to do that, but would love to know how to go back to previous version please…..as this is now way behind me, and I am not able to use the tool at all now, I had it working before, I would rather wait till all the bugs are sorted really, rather than getting frustrated when trying to use this version, which is clearly not up to the task ATM…
thanks

 

[robyx]

Not really as have no idea what one is or how to do that, but would love to know how to go back to previous version please…..as this is now way behind me, and I am not able to use the tool at all now, I had it working before, I would rather wait till all the bugs are sorted really, rather than getting frustrated when trying to use this version, which is clearly not up to the task ATM…
thanks

I am sorry for your frustration; I understand that, as a newbie, you would like tools to work on a click. This attitude, thus, does not help you at all and does not help us to understand if a real issue is occurring in your case or if that is a simple misconfiguration problem, a misunderstanding of the tool, a problem with the data, etc.

And, of course, I welcome your opinion about WBPP "clearly not being up to the task ATM"

My suggestion is to open a dedicated task where we can easily investigate your issue and provide a solution.

 

[ShedAstro]

I am sorry for your frustration; I understand that, as a newbie, you would like tools to work on a click. This attitude, thus, does not help you at all and does not help us to understand if a real issue is occurring in your case or if that is a simple misconfiguration problem, a misunderstanding of the tool, a problem with the data, etc.

And, of course, I welcome your opinion about WBPP "clearly not being up to the task ATM"

My suggestion is to open a dedicated task where we can easily investigate your issue and provide a solution.

could you please just answer my question, and point me to how to roll the WBPP back to the previous version so I can get on and learn the software while theses issues are being resolved by the people who know what they are doing….
thanks

 

[robyx]

could you please just answer my question, and point me to how to roll the WBPP back to the previous version so I can get on and learn the software while theses issues are being resolved by the people who know what they are doing….
thanks

I won't "just answer your question". I "kindly answer" your question, ignoring your meaningless sarcasm.

Run the Installer, selected "Repair" and you'll get back PixInsight as it was after that clean install.

Avoid updating, until you retain it's the right moment to do it. When you update accept all updates, WBPP and tools are often upgraded together, so updating Star Alignment or Local Normalization without updating WBPP at the same time may lead to a "non up to the task" WBPP status.

 

[ShedAstro]

I won't "just answer your question". I "kindly answer" your question, ignoring your meaningless sarcasm.

Run the Installer, selected "Repair" and you'll get back PixInsight as it was after that clean install.

Avoid updating, until you retain it's the right moment to do it. When you update accept all updates, WBPP and tools are often upgraded together, so updating Star Alignment or Local Normalization without updating WBPP at the same time may lead to a "non up to the task" WBPP status.

I want it back to before I had the clean install with the new WBPP, I want to be using the previous version of WBPP that worked ok for me, I was not being sarcastic, I had asked a question to get back to a previous version 3 times and you did not tell me, I explained I know nothing about log files and such like so could not provide those, as I am a complete newbie with this software, it was a genuine question, I realise that with a new version there can be bugs, and I should not have updated, it was my mistake….

 

[robyx]

I want it back to before I had the clean install with the new WBPP, I want to be using the previous version of WBPP that worked ok for me, I was not being sarcastic, I had asked a question to get back to a previous version 3 times and you did not tell me, I explained I know nothing about log files and such like so could not provide those, as I am a complete newbie with this software, it was a genuine question, I realise that with a new version there can be bugs, and I should not have updated, it was my mistake….

there is not a clean way to roll back to an intermediate update; PixInsight offers the very last versions of processes and scripts so even if you repair the installation the update will propose WBPP 2.5.1.

I am really sure that solving your problems will be much easier than trying to roll back. I invite you again to open a dedicated thread, we will easily figure it out.

 

[ShedAstro]

there is not a clean way to roll back to an intermediate update; PixInsight offers the very last versions of processes and scripts so even if you repair the installation the update will propose WBPP 2.5.1.

I am really sure that solving your problems will be much easier than trying to roll back. I invite you again to open a dedicated thread, we will easily figure it out.

Bloody Great, I wish I had known this before the update….
well you live and learn
i feel sorry for Adam Block as he now has a boat load of new WBPP videos to create…..??

 

[StuartT]

LPS+LPD works for gray images only. Are you sure you're providing gray images? If not, WBPP would behave as you described; it will skip the LPS+LPD immediately and will not create any output folder for it since nothing needs to be generated.

Are you sure about this? I have just run WBPP 2.5.1 on four RGB images and LPS+LPD ran as the first process. I watched it happen in the process console and it has generated an output folder containing the four files with the added suffix _lps

 

[robyx]

Are you sure about this? I have just run WBPP 2.5.1 on four RGB images and LPS+LPD ran as the first process. I watched it happen in the process console and it has generated an output folder containing the four files with the added suffix _lps

Is the group marked as CFA in the calibration panel? it may happen that some files are not recognized as CFA and are configured as gray, you always have to check this under the calibration settings and set the group as CFA manually if needed.

 

[StuartT]

Is the group marked as CFA in the calibration panel? it may happen that some files are not recognized as CFA and are configured as gray, you always have to check this under the calibration settings and set the group as CFA manually if needed.

No, the images are normal colour images (not CFA) so I didn't check this box. I thought I only had to check the CFA box if the images were not yet de-bayered images from an OSC. The images I am processing are colour

 

[neverfox]

- in drizzle integration options I can't find Kernel function VarShape. I usually go for VarShape 1.5 which I find producing the best results with my data. Is there a reason why to limit the choice to only three options?

Same here. Hopefully it's in the next release, if it's just a matter of adding it to the dropdown.

 

[robyx]

No, the images are normal colour images (not CFA) so I didn't check this box. I thought I only had to check the CFA box if the images were not yet de-bayered images from an OSC. The images I am processing are colour

could you upload the log file? I'll figure out what happened.

 

[StuartT]

could you upload the log file? I'll figure out what happened.

Thanks. Just fyi, it's the same run I refer to in this thread.

This forum doesn't seem to allow txt files as attachments. Do you want me just to copy and paste it?

EDIT: no worries. I zipped it

 

[robyx]

Thanks. Just fyi, it's the same run I refer to in this thread.

This forum doesn't seem to allow txt files as attachments. Do you want me just to copy and paste it?

EDIT: no worries. I zipped it

thanks! the group of light frames is gray; you need to check the "CFA images" checkbox if the images come from an OSC camera:

 

[StuartT]

thanks! the group of light frames is gray; you need to check the "CFA images" checkbox if the images come from an OSC camera:

View attachment 15894

I'm not sure what makes you think the light frames are gray. They are RGB images! Here is one of them opened up in PI and screen stretched.

 

[ShedAstro]

there is not a clean way to roll back to an intermediate update; PixInsight offers the very last versions of processes and scripts so even if you repair the installation the update will propose WBPP 2.5.1.

I am really sure that solving your problems will be much easier than trying to roll back. I invite you again to open a dedicated thread, we will easily figure it out.

Never mind I have sorted it now and found a solution to getting the older version back on another forum…
so am back to where it all works perfectly fine, I won’t be updating anytime soon…

 

[nico1038]

Never mind I have sorted it now and found a solution to getting the older version back on another forum…
so am back to where it all works perfectly fine, I won’t be updating anytime soon…

Good for you. So you claim to have found bug(s) but you refuse to provide anything to help the developers (even a simple description of what is going on!). I hope you understand it's not helping anyone but you. This is not the way

 

[robyx]

I'm not sure what makes you think the light frames are gray. They are RGB images! Here is one of them opened up in PI and screen stretched.

are these images already debayered? Keep in mind that WBPP is not designed to handle already debayered images.

 

[StuartT]

are these images already debayered? Keep in mind that WBPP is not designed to handle already debayered images.

yes, they are. I often use WBPP on already debayered images and it does a very nice job. I just ensure the CFA box is not checked in these cases. What is wrong with using WBPP on already debayered images?