Hi bro - just a couple of points to make - I'm putting this sentence in caps because a lot of newcomers will read your posts & get a wrong idea or 2..!!!
You're right about most of the conditions needed for good imaging - but polar alignment (PA) is not one of them!
Of course it can help having good PA to ensure that the smallest height of any ROI can be utilised to maximise frame-rates...but your:
<"the best polar alignment. Minimal drift helps so much with getting quality frames.">
isn't correct...some believe that a bit of image wandering during capture is actually beneficial - but apart from allowing you to not have any worries at all with the planet staying in your fov, "best" polar alignment does nothing for the image outcome qualities unless you have it so poor you cannot focus or whatever!
Also, is that 20 minute Saturnavi derotated..? I suspect not, apologies if I'm wrong there but there used to be a lot of images on the net taken using very long timespans for Saturn - with only subtle belt irregularities & the Polar Hex it can appear very attractive still without derotation. (in this case it would have to have been video derotation if it was)
Try that on Jove & you'd get an ugly set of blurred but very contrasty belts..!
Regardless, your Jovian images are very nice - your recent changes to processing have really lifted your images imo bro!
Filmy clouds are always going to detract from the possible results (our most recent ones were taken under similar conditiions btw) but yours are still very good & as said your "new" processing approach is great!