MultiScale Gradient Correction and MARS Initial Release is Here! Time for a Look!



We would love to have you in the community:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCHeW7wuxfjhMmymXC9KqIbg/join

PixInsight V1.9 is here, along with a huge amount of updates the long awaited MARS initial release and Multiscale Gradient Correction is here. Let’s dive in and look at the good and the bad.

Looking for astronomy gear?
Use my links to Agena Astro or High Point Scientific and support the channel!
https://agenaastro.com/?rfsn=8135169.ac4de7
https://www.highpointscientific.com/?rfsn=8137176.78720d

source

21 thoughts on “MultiScale Gradient Correction and MARS Initial Release is Here! Time for a Look!”

  1. Good first video. But what do the fitler selection dropdowns in MGC do? How do they relate to the RGB channels in my image? I am using an OSC with an Askar D1 filter, so my channels are not really pure Ha and Oiii data. I have been leaving them as defaults (R, G and B). In the flux calculation I have been choosing the Askar filters, but for QE curve I have been using "Ideal QE curve" as this is what is suggested in SPCC documentation.

    Reply
  2. Thanks for this video. I think I have a pretty good handle now how to use it. I too thought when Mars came out, it would be pretty much a button push. Even though it’s not, it still is awesome as a tool.

    Reply
  3. nice, between this and pixinsight’s MGC optimization video i feel like i’ll have a better idea of how to adjust things to get the best results. i too am a bit surprised that there’s less scientific rigour and more ‘expectations’ involved in getting a good result, but it makes sense. I’d also like to see how this goes in using your own widefield image taken at the same time, like if you’re imaging something that’s outside of the reference survey right now. as well as, like what many people are already saying, how well this will work for OSC dual band filter setups

    Reply
  4. Thanks for the video Frank, unfortunately us Southerners have to wait for the database to be updated as it only features some southern , most Milkyway and the Northern skies. Would love you to work out a script to simplify the process. That would be awesome.

    Reply
  5. I'm still mostly pulling gradients manually. True, I only have to deal with gradients created by moonlight, but I find I get better results just extracting them out through application of discreet tools in Affinity Photo and PhotoLab 8.

    Reply
  6. My heart sank when I saw that you need to run Image Solver, it has never worked very well for me. Then I remembered you have a Blind Solver script and now I’m excited to give it a test drive, so thanks for that!

    Reply
  7. I think fundamentally it boils down to good idea, bad implementation. They are trying to match a mmt of a short focal length reference image to a mmt of the long focal length target image. Subtract them, then ideally you are just left with gradient. However since the target image is necessarily going to have more detail and SNR the mmt's will never match. The subtraction will strip a ton of signal. What they should do is use something like ADBE on the target image. Use ADBE on the reference image (assuming it is already "flat"). Subtract those two backgrounds. Now that is the real gradient that needs to be removed from the original target image. They dont make the reference data accessible otherwise we could implement something like that

    Reply
  8. You mentioned several times that certain areas are over corrected, or under corrected. From your perspective, i gather that it's a fairly simple determination.
    However, I have no reference for what a properly-corrected area of nebulosity SHOULD look like.
    Do you have any guidance on how to develop the skill to quickly determining whether an area is over- or under-corrected?
    Perhaps a video?

    Reply

Leave a Comment