|
tamiyatanks
sage
Reged: 08/27/10
Loc: East Ferris Ontario
|
Nebulosity VS Meade Software for DSI
#4161053 - 11/03/10 03:14 PM
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
I have read that Nebulosity is better than "stock" software.
Can you Nebulosity users confim when using the original DSI for planet and deep space, it beats the included Autostar suite of software for capturing?
|
Charlie B
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 03/22/08
Loc: Sterling, Virginia
|
Re: Nebulosity VS Meade Software for DSI
[Re: tamiyatanks]
#4161070 - 11/03/10 03:21 PM
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
If you are happy with automatic dark subtraction and stacking, no. However, if don't want to use this Autostar feature, yes. The caveat is that Nebulosity far exceeds Autostar in image processing, not capturing.
Charlie B
|
DanB
No Capos Allowed
Reged: 12/05/07
Loc: Central Oregon High Desert
|
Re: Nebulosity VS Meade Software for DSI
[Re: Charlie B]
#4161261 - 11/03/10 04:46 PM
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
I use Nebulosity for capture and preprocess both, I like it far better than I did Autostar Suite. Nebulosity user interface is far easier IMO. I rarely image with my DSI 1 but its still guiding under PHD and Nebulosity perfectly. Yep, Nebulosity, Pixinsight and Photoshop CS4 does most everything I need at this time and I'm happy with it. If I did miss anything from Autostar suite I have long forgotten about it. Regards, Dan
|
jgraham
Postmaster
   
Reged: 12/02/04
Loc: Dayton, Ohio
|
Re: Nebulosity VS Meade Software for DSI
[Re: DanB]
#4161424 - 11/03/10 06:06 PM
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
I have both but I prfer to use Envisage for capturing, alignment, and stacking. I mostly use Nebulosity for its really nice color ballance function and converting my final FITS3P image to TIFF. I used to use it for a lot more than that, but I eventually migrated back to Envisage for acquisition and stacking, Nebulosity for color ballance and format conversion, and Photoshop for final processing.
|
Ronny
sage
Reged: 12/23/08
Loc: Perth Western Australia
|
Re: Nebulosity VS Meade Software for DSI
[Re: jgraham]
#4162352 - 11/04/10 03:34 AM
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
As far as I am concerned Nebulosity is a User friendly easy to use Program, both in Capturing and processing. Major image processing is best done in Photoshop. you Dont have to be a scientist to know how to use it. Everything else is way too complicated.
|
w orchid
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 04/23/07
Loc: Tampa, Fl
|
Re: Nebulosity VS Meade Software for DSI
[Re: Ronny]
#4162772 - 11/04/10 10:22 AM
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
$ per $, Nebulosity maybe the best software available. See above.
|
jgraham
Postmaster
   
Reged: 12/02/04
Loc: Dayton, Ohio
|
Re: Nebulosity VS Meade Software for DSI
[Re: w orchid]
#4163023 - 11/04/10 12:45 PM
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
Nebulosity is worth having even if you don't use it for acquisition, and with it you always have that option. It's just such a nice collection of tools and it's a great value.
|
rigel123
Postmaster
   
Reged: 06/29/09
Loc: SW Ohio
|
Re: Nebulosity VS Meade Software for DSI
[Re: jgraham]
#4163324 - 11/04/10 02:45 PM
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
Quote:
I have both but I prfer to use Envisage for capturing, alignment, and stacking. I mostly use Nebulosity for its really nice color ballance function and converting my final FITS3P image to TIFF. I used to use it for a lot more than that, but I eventually migrated back to Envisage for acquisition and stacking, Nebulosity for color ballance and format conversion, and Photoshop for final processing.
I follow this same structure, although I have to admit I haven't tried Nebulosity for capture as I find Envisage extremely simple to use.
|
Charlie B
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 03/22/08
Loc: Sterling, Virginia
|
Re: Nebulosity VS Meade Software for DSI
[Re: tamiyatanks]
#4163471 - 11/04/10 03:53 PM
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
I've stopped using Autostar for almost everything and us Nebulosity instead. The reasons are:
I guide with PhD guiding and Nebulosity has an interface with it. I was never successful guiding with autostar, even when I had a Meade mount.
Nebulosity has a fine focus capability that is much better than autostar.
I use DSI cameras primarily for guiding and take most photographs with a DSLR that is not supported by autostar.
I like Nebulosity much more because I can capture and process with a single program that has the same interface and controls.
Hope this helps.
Charlie B
|
|
21 registered and 29 anonymous users are browsing this forum.
Moderator: Oldfield, bilgebay
Print Thread
|
Forum Permissions
You cannot start new topics
You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled
UBBCode is enabled
|
Thread views: 1081
|
|
|
|
|
|
|