Has anyone tried the new Astropixel Processor release? 1.083

I started out with APP for my DSO processing, but moved on to Siril, which I love.

But I got the announcement that APP had a new, faster version so I thought I'd try it out. It's still unbelievably slow! I'm processing some data at the moment that took Siril about 13 mins to reach a stacked, final result ready for postprocessing. APP has so far taken 45 mins and is still not finished! Unless the result is far superior, I am going to stick to Siril.

Am I being unfair? Does anyone have any views on this?

Hi Stuart,

I have been using APP for the last year and am also using the latest release. I can say it is faster but I did some testing against ASTAP for stacking, in comparison APP is still slow. I use a combination of Siril, APP and ASTAP as they offer some very different tools to help achieve the results I want.

APPs LP tool is excellent but removal of green (SCNR in PI) is not very good so I use Siril, also SIRIL has a very good background extraction tool as well as deconvolution. I must admit I am leaning towards Siril now but somehow the final results of stacked images seem to be better from APP and there is a very good level of control of the parameters for it. It’s channel blending tool is pretty ok too.

ASTAP has a good blinking tool and a good way to select good lights and discard the rest, it also has pixel math. I need to look into Siril as it has good light selection tools and I think with scripting Pixel Math can be used. Need to look into it.

On the whole I need a combination of the tools. All of these plus more is in the one tool - PI.

In answer to your question, APP is faster than before but is still quite slow in comparison to some other tools, but seems to yield a better result with more control over stacking parameters than Siril.

Thanks for this. So APP has finally finished. It took approx. ten times longer than Siril and comparing the results, I actually prefer the Siril one.

I should say, I am relatively new to astrophotography, so I am really only using the 'out of the box' settings (as I lack the expertise to know which settings to modify in either program).

But based on this, I see no reason to continue to use APP, I'm afraid

Stuart Taylor:
Thanks for this. So APP has finally finished. It took approx. ten times longer than Siril and comparing the results, I actually prefer the Siril one.

I should say, I am relatively new to astrophotography, so I am really only using the 'out of the box' settings (as I lack the expertise to know which settings to modify in either program).

But based on this, I see no reason to continue to use APP, I'm afraid

you could adjust how much memory is assigned =16px

It is incredibly faster compared to the previous version but not as fast as Siril.

However, you must be sure to compare apples to apples. Under the default (auto) settings APP will do calibration, union registration with dynamic distortion correction, normalization, weighted average with several rounds of local normalization. Be sure to change the settings so that it does the same things as Siril. And obviously you should compare only the length of each step (e.g. not 0 to finished image for APP vs just integration step for Siril)

Cheers,

Dimitris

It is incredibly faster compared to the previous version but not as fast as Siril.

However, you must be sure to compare apples to apples. Under the default (auto) settings APP will do calibration, union registration with dynamic distortion correction, normalization, weighted average with several rounds of local normalization. Be sure to change the settings so that it does the same things as Siril. And obviously you should compare only the length of each step (e.g. not 0 to finished image for APP vs just integration step for Siril)

Cheers,

Dimitris

Yes, that's a fair comment. I guess I am measuring in Siril up to the production of the 'result.FITS' But there are still things to do after that, such as background extraction, photometric colour calibration etc.

Also, I find it makes a big difference how you configure resource usage in APP. By default, it will underutilise your CPU and RAM. But if you give it too much (especially CPU) it might hog them.

Ultimately though: APP is Java, Siril is C++. Sometimes, it matters.

I've been using APP for nearly a year now, and like @Bradley Watson I use it for stacking and light pollution removal, and then SCNR and photometric colour calibration (sometimes) in Siril, and then back to APP for a quick stretch. I'm not extremely knowledgeable on the different kinds of stretches and their parameters, but I find that APP's stretches look better out-of-the-box than Siril's. My images definitely improved when I switched.

Where APP really shines is, as @dkamen mentions, the local normalization correction, distortion correction, but also granular control of drizzle. The mosaic features work really well, too.

One of my favourite features, though, is the evaluation APP does for each sub, allowing you to view graphs of your data and decide how many (and which) subs you want to include to get the sharpest stars, best detail, etc.

I'm currently using the renter's license for the software, and while I've heard great things about PI, I will likely rent for at least another year or two before I start using PI.

My advice? Keep playing with the features and see what's possible. That being said, Siril is incredibly useful for free software, in an otherwise extravagantly expensive hobby.

Also, awesome gallery @Stuart!

If you don't use the special features of APP (or PI) Deep Sky Stacker is much faster - I have no experience with Siril.
PI is even significantly slower than APP. Still, you use these programs for their additional features not for their speed. I had one session where DSS couldn't stack the images properly while APP and DSS could but this should be a rare occurence (one of my very first sessions with quite low quality data). So no point to go for APP or PI if you don't intend to invest the effort to delve into the capabilities of these programs - which is completely fine. After all it's a personal decision.

I grabbed it last night, processed 800 images from my RASA. Took about an hour total… really fast compared to before.

I am using it for my last imaging session, and i confirm is faster than older releases, expecially for composing my tawdry high-panel count mosaics.

I've been an APP user from the start and still using the 1.083 Beta. Works fine for stacking of my images, and still use it for stacking even though I moved most of my editing to PI.. I have no idea if the 1.083 release is any faster than the beta? I will have to download it and check it out! hopefully it's a bit faster.. with some of my 20-30hour exposure projects, things can take a while.

But I found that some of the new features in1.083 (the main reason why I wanted 1.083), like the star reducer/remover does quite a crap job. And I end up with artefacts, rings, or other things I don't want. StarXterminator or starnett in PI seem to do a better job.. Meaning that, for me at least, APP is currently only used for stacking, and maybe the light pollution tool.

I've made the "move" to pixinsight for a lot of the editing these days, Still learning the maze of options available there on the trial, but it seems to do a far better job at pulling out data than photoshop.. And APP seems to have too few options to really edit the pic after.. but I could just be using it wrong.. (that said, if I am using it wrong.. it's not very clear how I could be using many of the tools any better, and at times seem to lack a bit of control)

I agree with pretty much everyone here on there comments about APP. Personally I love it and it made a huge difference in my images moving from DSS to APP.

@Jaspal Chadha & @dkamen bring up a very good point, you can allocate memory usage at the top left hand side of the interface. This does make a big difference.

I’m currently processing my data with APP, then use the RGB Combine tool then I use the Light Pollution tool, save and then move over to PI. I’m using the trial version of PI and so far I like a lot of the features of it but its time consuming to figure out how to use them to the best of there ability’s.
Once done in PI, I still always endup tweaking in Gimp. Many like PS for this but for me I’ve just gotten used to Gimp and find it extremely powerful and FREE 😊

In summery, I’ve found (like many) for my workflow that I use several different softwares for my final result. I’m sure that PI can do everything I do with other softwares but I’ve gotten to the point that I have a workflow and get good results (at least I think so) so I’ll stay with what’s working for me. I’ll probably at some point buy PI and continue to learn the software.

IMHO without APP I would never have been able to transition to PI as quickly as I have so I’m very loyal to it and continue to use it in my work flow regaurdless of how “fast or slow” it is. Remember APP in its default settings do more then just an alignment and stacking of the data, so if you compare make sure to do it as close to apples & apples for comparison.

I've been using APP for 2 years now and the latest release is definitely faster. I have an ASI294MM and bin 2 stack jobs really fly. If I'm stacking bin 1 jobs the large file sizes really slow the process down. That being said, APP can't be beat in terms of handling multi-session jobs utilizing different filters and the corresponding calibration frames. The finished output is well worth the time IMO. The automatic stretch and light pollution removal tools provide a nice starting point for editing.

As others have commented, the new star removal/reduction tool is hit or miss. As a result, I still tend to use the Star Exterminator Photoshop plug-in. The star halo reduction tool has provided some promising results for me so I look forward to playing with it more. Right now I'm using APP and then finishing up in Photoshop. APP is supposed to be working on a big update that will add additional features. I hope that is true since I really like their user interface. If not, I will need to consider making the jump to Pixinsight assuming I can steel up enough nerve to tackle the learning curve.

Mark Germani:
Also, awesome gallery @Stuart!

thank you. I only started last year, so that's nice to hear!

Bob Rucker:
APP is supposed to be working on a big update that will add additional features. I hope that is true since I really like their user interface.

Yes, I heard that too over on their forum.

I am waiting for their "manual" that has been promised, too. Many are upset about that, but I've been able to make things work fairly easily and if I can't get something to work, I just post on their forum.

I really like what Mabula has done with that software!

I tried it. Then I finally decided to finally start learning how to integrate in PixInsight lol. Its still pretty slow but I can live with that. What I couldn't live with was the weird, random discolored pixels. I had a yellow splash of pixel size dots in Great Orion core of all places and another blue splash across the outside arms of the OIII along with a super strange halo/processed spike around Hatysa. I ran it several times and it would just change the placement. Literally looked like a colorful rash LoL I was able to remove it by changing the algorithm to AAD instead of my preferred Ha-OIII color. Needless to say I really liked using it and how you can load and play around with the different channels something that PI seems "too smart" to allow you to do as it groups by keywords which can be changed but then you have to find another way to group certain things. The learning curve is Real with PI but I still will keep APP on deck thats for certain.

I tried it. Then I finally decided to finally start learning how to integrate in PixInsight lol. Its still pretty slow but I can live with that. What I couldn't live with was the weird, random discolored pixels. I had a yellow splash of pixel size dots in Great Orion core of all places and another blue splash across the outside arms of the OIII along with a super strange halo/processed spike around Hatysa. I ran it several times and it would just change the placement. Literally looked like a colorful rash LoL I was able to remove it by changing the algorithm to AAD instead of my preferred Ha-OIII color. Needless to say I really liked using it and how you can load and play around with the different channels something that PI seems "too smart" to allow you to do as it groups by keywords which can be changed but then you have to find another way to group certain things. The learning curve is Real with PI but I still will keep APP on deck thats for certain.

I’ve never had any problem like your describing thats for sure! APP has done an awsome job for me, at least I feel it has. I agree however that I’ll always keep it and use it for processing my images. As you mention the ability to mix and adjust the channels are very much preferred over PI.
That said I do like PI for other things so like many I’ll use them both for specific things and in the end I always final tweak my images in Gimp.

I used to do all of my processing in APP. About 5 months ago, I started a new process that seems to work well for me. Now, I use APP for stacking and do Light Pollution Removal and then take that image into Siril where I do Photometric Color Calibration and my initial stretching of the image. Topaz Noise Reduction is quickly run on the image. Then, some images get Starnet start removal before heading into GIMP. In GIMP, I make a stars only image from the starless and then process those two images separately before recombining those images. GIMP is used mostly for additional stretching and maybe some saturation.

I use APP for stacking, as it does it the best, yes it is slower but the quality is better, if speed is truly that much of an issue than perhaps faster disks would be in order, as well as memory. If you are using platter drives it will be much slower simply due to the amount of data it creates in the stacking process.

After APP, I use Pixinsight for post processing, I tend to like its features for photo metric color calibration as well image stretching.

I use to use APP but switched to PI a couple months ago and haven't looked back tbh. I'll have to check out the new version. I did just recently get the Astro Panel Pro plugin for PS but haven't gotten a opportunity to use it yet.

I use both PI and AAP. Both run quite quickly on a M1 Mac. Like others, I use several apps for different things. Currently, it's AAP for stacking, PI for GAIA color correction, RC's sharpening, noise reduction, & star removal, and initial stretching. then photoshop for final polish.

Each of those routines appeal to different parts of the brain, so I can't imagine a single app or GUI performing all of those components equally well.

Dave Rust:
ICurrently, it's AAP for stacking, PI for GAIA color correction, RC's sharpening, noise reduction, & star removal, and initial stretching. then photoshop for final polish.

Dave,

that's exactly how I am doing it!

CS
Chris

I’m currently reprocessing a lot of old images - most shot with a dual-rig setup - and combining them with recent images. Since I’ve imaged with (too many) different cameras and image trains over the years the combinatorial possibilities escalate quickly. APP excels at this kind of complex workflow. Speed isn’t my primary concern.

Related discussions