Seti Astro Suite - a mini PixInsight? - Forums

Topic starter

Frequent contributor

Feb 12, 2025

For anyone who has not been keeping track, the free Seti Astro Suite software is growing very quickly into a very powerful stand-alone processing option. As of this writing SAS has the following features:

A blink comparator
Excellent sharpen and denoise functions
Satellite removal
Statistical stretch
ABE and Graxpert gradient removal
Post starnet blemish eliminator
Remove green and background neutralization
curves utility
Extract and recombine L channel
Extract and recombine RGB
HDR function
Contrast limited adaptive histogram equalization
Automatic palette creation
Narrowband to RGB stars
Starnet star removal
Star stretch and recombination
Frequency separation
Star halo reduction
Continuum subtraction
What's in my image
Morphological operations
Mosaic maker based on plate solving
Pixel math

Combined with Siril for stacking and Gimp for final adjustments you have a very powerful suite of tools. My question is: has all of this made PixInsight less relevant? The only thing I can think that is missing is BlurX's ability to correct star shapes but that can be done with Siril and a simple recombination operation. I'm curious about what the long time PI users think?

Helpful Insightful Respectful Engaging

Josh Jones

Feb 12, 2025

It won't be long… "Siri, make my astro image amazing…! " haha

GiffS

Feb 12, 2025

Short answer to your question is no. Frank’s stuff is amazing and he is obviously a stand up guy for giving it away. PixInSight is the state of the art, it is a full on scientific tool that is not for everyone. Whether cost or perceived complexity I understand why folks are cautious about PI. I started with Siril and Affinity Photo and they worked to a point in my progression. I moved to PixInSight a year or so ago and it has made all the difference in my work and enjoyment. No had Frank’s stand alone suite been available I might have waited a bit longer before moving to PI but I have no doubt I would have moved. The depth of PI is staggering and in addition to often providing incredible levels of adjustment and finesse (most of which are beyond my current understanding) quite often default settings do the trick. But the details are there if you so inclined.

I use Frank’s scripts from within PI all the time. They are excellent tools and compliment the other tools that are available.

Helpful Supportive

Carl Gulbish

Feb 12, 2025

First post here and I am a total newbie….So far from a beginner's perspective, PI is a beast which I am trying to learn. Seti Astro Suite seems a little less imposing and it's amazingly free. Especially if you are just sharing your images on social media or on the web. Frank has also integrated his version of BlurX (Cosmic Clarity) which works well.

Mel Martin

Feb 12, 2025

Frank is a master. I use many of his tools as scripts in PixInsight. and I have to say, PixInsight, while powerful, can be a cruel master. Almost every update I have to fix things that the update broke. I suffer through it because PI is so powerful and extensible. The SETI Astro suite is very cool, but at this point can't get you all the way there. But I applaud the effort and how well thought out his tools are. I wish all the tools in the sute could make it to PI, then you'd have the best of both worlds.

Supportive

Rostokko

Feb 12, 2025

Mel Martin:
I wish all the tools in the sute could make it to PI, then you'd have the best of both worlds.

I believe Frank is doing (so far, at least) a pretty good job at exposing all his tools in PI as well - with the exception of those ones which already have a native equivalent in PI.

Michael Jarvis

Feb 12, 2025

I have found the learning curve issues with Pixinsight to be over-rated, especially given the availability of user-friendly scripts from Frank, Bill Blanshen, Tony (Hidden Light Astrophotography) and others. There are also many extremely valuable YouTube tutorials from Cuiv, Saha Weiss, Adam Block and Tony to name a few. I have used PI for approximately 6 months and it is a learning journey for sure. That said, I found it pretty easy to get up and running with a basic grasp of processing fundamentals. The price is not cheap (essentially equivalent to a good NB filter) but worth every penny. For folks new to the hobby, do not be put off from taking on PI, you will be glad you did.

Well Written Helpful Engaging Supportive

GiffS

Feb 12, 2025

I have used a ton of YouTube videos and read the obligatory The Deep Sky Imaging Primer by Bracken and I am able to produce images that are pleasing to me and I am improving my workflows. I wanted to have a deeper understanding of PixInsight so I have purchased Adam Block's Fundamentals program and boy talk about drinking through a fire hose! Adam's detailed, in-depth, videos are exactly what I was looking for. Just as a silly example I had been struggling with an issue in WBPP and although I am only part way through, I now understand what I was doing wrong for the outcome I was expecting. Highly recommended if you want to go deep.

Helpful Concise Supportive

Oscar

Feb 12, 2025

Tony Gondola:
My question is: has all of this made PixInsight less relevant?

Alex Nicholas

Feb 13, 2025

Tony Gondola:
My question is: has all of this made PixInsight less relevant?

Not for anyone who's serious about astrophotography and getting the best from their data...
The average hobbist could probably be satisfied with it.

Things like statistical stretch.... overall it's not bad for a quick glance at what the data has to offer... it beats STF sure, - but it falls a LONG way short of GHS when it comes to emphasising specific aspects of your data, and that's sort of BASELINE functionality stuff...

For a very light user, who's only showing their data on social media and getting every last minutia of detail from their data is not high priority - sure - do away with PI. For anyone wanting real control over all aspects of their data, without just running 'cookie cutter' 'one size fits all' solutions to each step of processing, and AI controlled steps that, due to limited training data, their output is again, fairly standardised... Its no wonder so many peoples images are looking so similar these days..

maybe I'm just old and jaded, maybe the people really do just want to capture data, put it all in a folder and click a big green 'GO' button and have it do all the thinking for them...

AstroRBA

Feb 13, 2025

I've been using PixInsight for about two years now, the most recent year quite seriously. I played around before that with other software and was always let down.

PixInsight is simply AMAZING. I would pay *TEN times the price*. It's one of the best software packages that I've ever used (for any purpose!)

The current pricing scheme for PixInsight is a pittance compared to what you're going to lay out for good Astro equipment. And the learning curve is over sensationalized - it's really not that difficult. If you can imagine it you can probably do it somehow in PixInsight. There are many avenues towards similar results in PixInsight, each kind of like the personality of the user! Not to mention, as others have said, there's a wealth of great (free and paid) videos on PixInsight usage.

Being constantly frustrated with inferior software is a good way to taint your interest in AP - PixInsight can best be called a savior to the Art/Science (whatever you think it is! But that's another discussion!)

By the way, I like PixInsight in case you couldn't tell ! Ha Ha !

Engaging Supportive

John Hayes

Frequent contributor

Feb 13, 2025

I completely agree with AstroRBA. I'm a long time PI user and it is a world class piece of software. Juan and the whole PI development team really know their stuff and at this point, I can't imagine using anything else. The price is more than reasonable and there are a lot of plug in tools–along with lifetime updates. In my view, PI is a must have for anyone who is really serious about imaging. In my view, other free tools are mostly an introduction to processing.

John

Well Written Respectful

Tony Gondola

Topic starter

Frequent contributor

Feb 13, 2025

Alex Nicholas:
Tony Gondola:
My question is: has all of this made PixInsight less relevant?

Not for anyone who's serious about astrophotography and getting the best from their data...
The average hobbist could probably be satisfied with it.

Things like statistical stretch.... overall it's not bad for a quick glance at what the data has to offer... it beats STF sure, - but it falls a LONG way short of GHS when it comes to emphasising specific aspects of your data, and that's sort of BASELINE functionality stuff...

For a very light user, who's only showing their data on social media and getting every last minutia of detail from their data is not high priority - sure - do away with PI. For anyone wanting real control over all aspects of their data, without just running 'cookie cutter' 'one size fits all' solutions to each step of processing, and AI controlled steps that, due to limited training data, their output is again, fairly standardised... Its no wonder so many peoples images are looking so similar these days..

maybe I'm just old and jaded, maybe the people really do just want to capture data, put it all in a folder and click a big green 'GO' button and have it do all the thinking for them...

Thank you for that, finally a solid reason beyond it's just better.

AstroShed

Feb 13, 2025

Absolutely not, although the Set Astro Suite is excellent and free, it’s still lacking in may areas, the one big one for me is how slow it all is when you don’t have an NVIDA graphics based system, the AI based tools are really slow indeed, and almost unuseable, when used in my AMD based system, i have a pretty fast PC based in the Ryzen 9 5900 processor, and it’s super slow at running SETI Satro Suite. Also some things are a bit unintuitive and awkward to use, the new slots tool has helped but still a way to go. Also the layout is a bit 1980’s but useable.
But for a free option the work he must put in is incredible, and kudos to him for that, and I wish I was capable and clever enough to even write one simple script, but alas not to be.
Pixinsight is on another level totally to any other tool out there, and is here to stay for a long time to come, and I did not find it that hard to get my head round, as people told me it would be, and with plenty of online help, it makes it moot anyway.
there is not chance SETI Astro Suite will replace PI, ever IMHO

Dominik Weinbrenner

Feb 13, 2025 · Edited: Feb 13, 2025

To me the major drawback of SAS and Siril is the lack of a desktop environment.
SAS does it better than Siril afaik with different slots, but this is still far inferior to a full on desktop where I can arrange my masters, masks, star-only images etc.

It's baffling to me how people even work with Siril.

Well Written

Tony Gondola

Topic starter

Frequent contributor

Feb 13, 2025

Dominik Weinbrenner:
To me the major drawback of SAS and Siril is the lack of a desktop environment.
SAS does it better than Siril afaik with different slots, but this is still far inferior to a full on desktop where I can arrange my masters, masks, star-only images etc.

It's baffling to me how people even work with Siril.

I can only tell you how I do it. Siril works on the concept of a target directory so instead of keeping everything on a desktop workspace, I use the target directory and file naming to keep everything organized. I would submit that with really complicated projects the target directory system works better because you can only get so much on a single screen. Of course then you can counter that with more screens. Measures and countermeasures...

Cyril Richard

Feb 13, 2025

Dominik Weinbrenner:
It's baffling to me how people even work with Siril.

Very easily, and quickly

andrea tasselli

Frequent contributor

Feb 13, 2025

I have used PI for 13 years. Enough said…

Tryggve Dyrvik

Feb 14, 2025

Jump into it - your time, effort and equipment is more than worth it … if you grab PI today - tomorrow you will never look back. The cost of PI is a narrowband filter … PI it is not difficult, it is intuitive! Go for it!

AstroShed

Feb 14, 2025

SAS, is all a pain with updates, as the whole thing is re installed, and also, I have had real issues with my anti virus software not liking it and having to add it to a white list every time I update it, which is a real pain, so have deleted it now. And I will be sticking with PI.
this still takes nothing away from the superb work Frank has done and the fact it’s a very good free option indeed.

Tony Gondola

Topic starter

Frequent contributor

Feb 14, 2025

AstroShed:
SAS, is all a pain with updates, as the whole thing is re installed, and also, I have had real issues with my anti virus software not liking it and having to add it to a white list every time I update it, which is a real pain, so have deleted it now. And I will be sticking with PI.
this still takes nothing away from the superb work Frank has done and the fact it’s a very good free option indeed.

In defence of SAS, yes it has to be reinstalled with every update but it's far from a pain. When you open the program it will ask if you want the latest update. Say yes and it will download it for you. Move the .exe file onto your desktop, open it and tell Windows that you want to run it and you're done. The whole process takes about 60 seconds.

I also never said anything about leaving PI for SAS and I can't imagine anyone would. The question of my post was, is there less of a reason to get into PI in the first place because of the availability of free tools that can do many of the same things. It's not about one being better than the other, it was just about choices and results.

Helpful

Tony Gondola

Topic starter

Frequent contributor

Feb 14, 2025

Tryggve Dyrvik:
Jump into it - your time, effort and equipment is more than worth it ... if you grab PI today - tomorrow you will never look back. The cost of PI is a narrowband filter ... PI it is not difficult, it is intuitive! Go for it!

Actually, I've had two full trial rounds with PI and to be honest, it just wasn't for me although I really wanted it to be. I didn't find it that hard to use although it can be needlessly obscure at times and stacking is painfully slow. For me, the bottom line was, it didn't improve my work. There was never a "wow, I've gotta have this" moment. Now, in the interest of full disclosure, I shoot OSC so my workflow is fairly simple compared to a typical mono/LRGB process. I'm also fully aware that people love what they use and are familiar with. It's human nature and a big factor in discussions like this. I'm sure I am subject to all the usual biases, same as everyone else.

Well Written Insightful Respectful Concise Engaging Supportive

Richard Carande

Feb 14, 2025

Tony Gondola:
Tryggve Dyrvik:
Jump into it - your time, effort and equipment is more than worth it ... if you grab PI today - tomorrow you will never look back. The cost of PI is a narrowband filter ... PI it is not difficult, it is intuitive! Go for it!

... For me, the bottom line was, it didn't improve my work...

A lot of where people are in their astrophotography post-processing journey has to do with the knowledge and tools they used before getting into this hobby. I used LR/PS for years with my other photography interests. People coming to the hobby with no "luggage" may learn to love and exploit PixInsight to its fullest. It seems to do the trick.

I tried to love PI, the arguable gold standard. But I had a similar experience using PI as described above. I spent a bit of time trying to master PI, (for OSC also), but never saw any improvement over what I was already doing. And everything took much longer. Admittedly, I'm sure that would improve as my workflow and familiarity improved, but there did seem to be an inherent slowness about PI, especially if you need to tweak things a bit.

My current process is to stack and do some initial processing in AstroPixelProcess (which works flawlessly almost 100% of the time), use PI only for access to Russel Crowman's BXT, and then bring everything into LightRoom / PhotoShop for final processing, including using Photoshop versions of RC's NXT and SXT. I like the instant feedback of LR/PS tools, and don't seem to be missing anything from PI. Another issue I've had with PI (and still do just trying to use BXT), is the stability on my Mac Studio M1 -- I would say 25% of the time it seems to crash or hang when open, for no apparent reason. Not sure if this is a general mac issue, or just me, but I'm not really interested in exploring much further.

Getting back to the original thread's SAS topic, I like those tools. Some are unique and can be helpful. But I wish SAS was a bit easier to install on a mac, and get running. Also, at least in my experience, it seems to require opening up a linux window to start the tools. Not too difficult but another complication/step. For now, I don't feel like SAS has all the capabilities I need and use. I only open SAS tools when I need something special (like "what's in my image" -- love that one!).

So, I agree with many here who conclude SAS is not quite a replacement for PI (yet), or like me whatever other successful process you are using. I do look forward to having this statement become obsolete!

Helpful Insightful Respectful Engaging

AstroShed

Feb 14, 2025

So, I agree with many here who conclude SAS is not quite a replacement for PI (yet), or like me whatever other successful process you are using. I do look forward to having this statement become obsolete!

It will NEVER replace PI, let’s be real here, there is too much knowledge within the team of developers at PI, and as much as SAS advances, so will PI, and the gap will never close, don’t get me wrong SAS is an excellent tool, and kudos to Frank, but the tools within it lack the advancement of PI tools in every way, yes there are a couple of useful features that are not in PI, and for that alone it’s worth having it installed, but will never replace PI, IMHO anyway.

Tony Gondola

Topic starter

Frequent contributor

Feb 14, 2025

Richard Carande:
Tony Gondola:
Tryggve Dyrvik:
Jump into it - your time, effort and equipment is more than worth it ... if you grab PI today - tomorrow you will never look back. The cost of PI is a narrowband filter ... PI it is not difficult, it is intuitive! Go for it!

... For me, the bottom line was, it didn't improve my work...

A lot of where people are in their astrophotography post-processing journey has to do with the knowledge and tools they used before getting into this hobby. I used LR/PS for years with my other photography interests. People coming to the hobby with no "luggage" may learn to love and exploit PixInsight to its fullest. It seems to do the trick.

I tried to love PI, the arguable gold standard. But I had a similar experience using PI as described above. I spent a bit of time trying to master PI, (for OSC also), but never saw any improvement over what I was already doing. And everything took much longer. Admittedly, I'm sure that would improve as my workflow and familiarity improved, but there did seem to be an inherent slowness about PI, especially if you need to tweak things a bit.

My current process is to stack and do some initial processing in AstroPixelProcess (which works flawlessly almost 100% of the time), use PI only for access to Russel Crowman's BXT, and then bring everything into LightRoom / PhotoShop for final processing, including using Photoshop versions of RC's NXT and SXT. I like the instant feedback of LR/PS tools, and don't seem to be missing anything from PI. Another issue I've had with PI (and still do just trying to use BXT), is the stability on my Mac Studio M1 -- I would say 25% of the time it seems to crash or hang when open, for no apparent reason. Not sure if this is a general mac issue, or just me, but I'm not really interested in exploring much further.

Getting back to the original thread's SAS topic, I like those tools. Some are unique and can be helpful. But I wish SAS was a bit easier to install on a mac, and get running. Also, at least in my experience, it seems to require opening up a linux window to start the tools. Not too difficult but another complication/step. For now, I don't feel like SAS has all the capabilities I need and use. I only open SAS tools when I need something special (like "what's in my image" -- love that one!).

So, I agree with many here who conclude SAS is not quite a replacement for PI (yet), or like me whatever other successful process you are using. I do look forward to having this statement become obsolete!

That's exactly how I use it. a few of the tools in SAS are very useful, just like Siril, Graxpert, Topaz and so on. Working that way gives a lot of choice which is great because the data sometimes demands a different tool. To be honest, and maybe this is my photographic background showing but I do at least half of my work in Affinity Photo. All the grunt work is done with the usual tools but AFF is where I take the raw, partially stretched and processed image and bring it up to a finished product. For me, that's where the real creativity happens.

Helpful Insightful Respectful Engaging