Jump to content

  •  

CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.

Photo

New PS plug-in for removing stars, StarXTerminator

  • Please log in to reply
101 replies to this topic

#1 JamesTX

JamesTX

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 600
  • Joined: 27 Aug 2017
  • Loc: Texas

Posted 15 September 2021 - 01:30 AM

Hi all,

 

A new plugin was released for photoshop that removes stars from images.. and it does it without leaving artifacts.  I posted a short review on youtube that shows several images. 

 

 

 

https://www.youtube....h?v=NYkjtuGQTs8

 

 

 

Attached Thumbnails

  • V2_PS_1600.jpg

  • R Botero, mikewayne3, james7ca and 5 others like this

#2 sharkmelley

sharkmelley

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,826
  • Joined: 19 Feb 2013
  • Loc: UK

Posted 15 September 2021 - 04:40 AM

That looks very effective!

 

I skimmed through the video but didn't find anywhere where you show it being applied in Photoshop.

 

Mark


Edited by sharkmelley, 15 September 2021 - 05:11 AM.

  • calypsob and JamesTX like this

#3 Tapio

Tapio

    Aurora

  • -----
  • Posts: 4,683
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2006
  • Loc: Tampere, Finland

Posted 15 September 2021 - 04:53 AM

I downloaded the trial but couldn't get it to work with CS5, or Affinity Photo.
Anyone successful?

#4 terry59

terry59

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 10,497
  • Joined: 18 Jul 2011
  • Loc: Colorado, USA

Posted 15 September 2021 - 06:45 AM

Thanks for the heads up on this James. I use Russell Croman's other plug ins and have downloaded the trial of this. 

 

It IS for PS, both Win and Mac...see below (the Mac instructions are in a different pdf)

 

 

Attached Thumbnails

  • Capture.JPG

Edited by terry59, 15 September 2021 - 06:46 AM.

  • JamesTX likes this

#5 calypsob

calypsob

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 6,751
  • Joined: 20 Apr 2013
  • Loc: Virginia

Posted 15 September 2021 - 08:42 AM

Sometimes Im a sucker for a pretty picture and a good sales pitch. On Russells site https://www.rc-astro...tarXTerminator/ he says it outperforms Starnett ++ in every respect. And just look at those words used to describe star removal, neural network architecture. Does this dig into my brains processor and remove stars? I dunno it sounds fancy. I’ll definitely give this a go when I get home. 


  • JamesTX likes this

#6 JamesTX

JamesTX

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 600
  • Joined: 27 Aug 2017
  • Loc: Texas

Posted 15 September 2021 - 09:53 AM

That looks very effective!

 

I skimmed through the video but didn't find anywhere where you show it being applied in Photoshop.

 

Mark

Thanks Mark.  I didn't show the part in photoshop.  I probably should have but its just going to filters, selecting starxterminator, hit a button the "calibrate" and then hitting another button that labeled "ok".   It works really well on most of the images I tested.. did okay with a couple of them.. and did not work at all on that galaxy/widefield shot. 



#7 JamesTX

JamesTX

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 600
  • Joined: 27 Aug 2017
  • Loc: Texas

Posted 15 September 2021 - 09:55 AM

Sometimes Im a sucker for a pretty picture and a good sales pitch. On Russells site https://www.rc-astro...tarXTerminator/ he says it outperforms Starnett ++ in every respect. And just look at those words used to describe star removal, neural network architecture. Does this dig into my brains processor and remove stars? I dunno it sounds fancy. I’ll definitely give this a go when I get home. 

lol



#8 whwang

whwang

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,705
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2013

Posted 15 September 2021 - 11:21 AM

I appreciate if someone can post a comparison between this one and StarNet++, for speed and effectiveness in removing stars.

I am too busy these days. Otherwise I would try it by myself.

On the other hand, I am not sure I would pay that price even if it really outperforms StarNet++ in every way, given that StarNet++ is free at this moment.
  • calypsob likes this

#9 JamesTX

JamesTX

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 600
  • Joined: 27 Aug 2017
  • Loc: Texas

Posted 15 September 2021 - 11:29 AM

I appreciate if someone can post a comparison between this one and StarNet++, for speed and effectiveness in removing stars.

I am too busy these days. Otherwise I would try it by myself.

On the other hand, I am not sure I would pay that price even if it really outperforms StarNet++ in every way, given that StarNet++ is free at this moment.

The video that's linked shows the difference in effectiveness between starnet and this plug-in.  Here's a link to the time mark that shows both side by side.  starnet on left, starXterminator right.  https://youtu.be/NYkjtuGQTs8?t=152

 

Speed is similar.  StarXterminator was a little quicker I felt.  Both have GPU support.. with the right gpu it runs very quick.. measured in seconds.

 

Price is a fair point.  Starnet is free but StarEterminator is superior.  Maybe Starnet will get an update.


  • whwang likes this

#10 whwang

whwang

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,705
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2013

Posted 15 September 2021 - 11:37 AM

Is there a list of supported GPU? I have AMD GPUs in my computers, and they are not supported by StarNet.

#11 JamesTX

JamesTX

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 600
  • Joined: 27 Aug 2017
  • Loc: Texas

Posted 15 September 2021 - 11:48 AM

Is there a list of supported GPU? I have AMD GPUs in my computers, and they are not supported by StarNet.

From their website:

 

System Requirements

    MacOS
        Version 10.15 (Catalina) or later
        Photoshop CS5 or later
        GPU/Neural Engine recommended for fast performance, but not required. Not all GPUs are supported. StarXTerminator will automatically use the CPU if the GPU is not supported.
    Windows
        Windows verson 8.1 or later
        Photoshop CS4 or later (64-bit)
        GPU or other neural network acceleration hardware recommended for fast performance, but not required. StarXTerminator will automatically use the CPU if the GPU is not supported.

 

 

 

Doesn't specify.  I have nvidia.. but I have not installed the cuda drivers so it ran on my system without using the gpu and didn't take that long.  Maybe a few mins.



#12 james7ca

james7ca

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 10,031
  • Joined: 21 May 2011
  • Loc: San Diego, CA

Posted 15 September 2021 - 12:51 PM

I downloaded the free trial (thanks for the heads up JamesTX) and I got it to work on my lowly late 2012 Mac mini with 8GB of DRAM and a 2.3 GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 with integrated graphics. On this particular hardware it seems to be a real CPU hog, almost unable to use anything else while the filter is running and it took several minutes to process a 21 mega pixel color image from my ASI183 camera.

 

However, the result were pretty nice on the first image I tried  (Cocoon Nebula with a very large number of background stars -- but with very few over the top of the nebula itself). I've only used StarNet++ a few times and I was never able to get something that didn't require a lot of retouching, so StarXTerminator is definitely looking good.

 

The only thing I had to do to get the plugin recognized was to move it into the /Applications/Adobe Photoshop <version>/Plug-ins directory. It didn't seem to want to load when I had it in /Library/Application Support/Adobe/Plug-Ins/...

 

For Apple M1 users, the docs seem to suggest that it runs very well on that hardware (which is something that StarNet++ currently can't do).


Edited by james7ca, 16 September 2021 - 07:13 AM.

  • Lead_Weight and JamesTX like this

#13 GrandadCast

GrandadCast

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,071
  • Joined: 23 Jan 2011
  • Loc: Hill Country, Texas

Posted 15 September 2021 - 12:56 PM

How does it compare to Annie’s Astro Actions? 

 

Edit: I would try the test myself but power for miles around is down as the power company is upping the 7K to 14K voltage on the main lines. 30 poles trucks line my road not counting all the pickups. Now this teaser plugin happens and it’s worst not knowing than no home internet, air conditioning and TV, that’s when you know your down this rabbit hole of imaging processing.

 

Jess


Edited by GrandadCast, 15 September 2021 - 01:01 PM.

  • JamesTX likes this

#14 crackout

crackout

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 132
  • Joined: 12 Mar 2021
  • Loc: Augsburg, Germany

Posted 15 September 2021 - 01:23 PM

I gave this a test using an absolute brutal star field.

 

See for yourself, it can't do wonders, but the star remains have less artifacts. However, the background suffers.

 

Image was calibrated, DBE'ed, deconvoluted, denoised and finally stretched before this test.

 

Comparison
 
 
Here's a zoomed view on some stars:

 

Comparison detail
 
 
I then subtracted the starless results from the initial photo to get the stars only:
 
Comparison stars
 
 
You can see that the remaining nebulosity is greater in the StarXTerminator version, which means that subtracted starless version has less nebulosity removed by the script, which is a good thing.

 

 
 
I will try it on a more forgiving star field, lol.

Edited by crackout, 15 September 2021 - 01:36 PM.

  • Hobby Astronomer likes this

#15 JamesTX

JamesTX

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 600
  • Joined: 27 Aug 2017
  • Loc: Texas

Posted 15 September 2021 - 02:02 PM

 

I gave this a test using an absolute brutal star field.

 

See for yourself, it can't do wonders, but the star remains have less artifacts. However, the background suffers.

 

Image was calibrated, DBE'ed, deconvoluted, denoised and finally stretched before this test.

 

 
 
 
Here's a zoomed view on some stars:

 

 
 
 
I then subtracted the starless results from the initial photo to get the stars only:
 
 
 
 
You can see that the remaining nebulosity is greater in the StarXTerminator version, which means that subtracted starless version has less nebulosity removed by the script, which is a good thing.

 

 
 
I will try it on a more forgiving star field, lol.

 

Yea.. it didn't well on my M100 wide field shot either...  With it being AI based, there will be constant updates so I would not be surprised if it can handle images like this better in the future. 


  • Hobby Astronomer likes this

#16 GrandadCast

GrandadCast

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,071
  • Joined: 23 Jan 2011
  • Loc: Hill Country, Texas

Posted 15 September 2021 - 02:32 PM

No go on my CS4. Location of the four files are located in this folder "C:\Program Files\Adobe\Adobe Photoshop CS4 (64 Bit)\Plug-ins\StarXTerminator". I also moved the four files into just the Plug-ins, no go so put them back into the folder I created "StarXerminator".

 

I changed the folder to CC, still no go. Placed them into C:\Program Files\Common\Adobe\Plug-Ins\CC, hey may get lucky, but no. Also into the 32 bit same no go.

 

My other files in the plug-in 64 are working, Noise Nija, Astra Image, RC-Astro, and a few others I have added over the years.

 

 

Jess


Edited by GrandadCast, 15 September 2021 - 03:04 PM.

  • Hobby Astronomer likes this

#17 Tapio

Tapio

    Aurora

  • -----
  • Posts: 4,683
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2006
  • Loc: Tampere, Finland

Posted 15 September 2021 - 02:51 PM

No go on my CS4. Location of the four files are located in this folder "C:\Program Files\Adobe\Adobe Photoshop CS4 (64 Bit)\Plug-ins\StarXTerminator". I also moved the four files into just the Plug-ins, no go so put them back into the folder I created "StarXerminator".

 

Jess

Good to know I'm not the only one with same problem.

We have exchanged some emails with Russer. Hopefully sorted.

I just looked up some settings and now I can at leas see the plugin in Affinity Photo. Had to cahnge this setting.

Still not doing anything.

Attached Thumbnails

  • affinity-photo-plugin.jpg

  • Hobby Astronomer likes this

#18 rcroman

rcroman

    GradientXTerminator and StarShrink Author

  • -----
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 33
  • Joined: 03 Oct 2014

Posted 16 September 2021 - 01:48 AM

Hi y'all.

 

Glad this is looking more useful than not. Thanks for the patience with a new tool. As usual with software development, it works great on all of my test systems, but there are many scenarios in the wild.

 

In case it helps anyone, I'm maintaining a list of known issues and planned improvements on the support page:

 

https://www.rc-astro...tor/support.php

 

-Russ

 


  • TimN, R Botero, sharkmelley and 4 others like this

#19 mackiedlm

mackiedlm

    Messenger

  • -----
  • Posts: 466
  • Joined: 16 Jul 2019
  • Loc: Galway, Ireland

Posted 16 September 2021 - 03:43 AM

I have run some tests with this and have found that it makes a significantly better job on the same image when compared to Starnet++ in Pixinsight. On the images i tested there were virtually no obvious anomalies on the StarXterminator output.

 

In particular the box pattern artifact I often get from bright stars with Starnet++ is completely absent with StarXterminator.

 

The image size limit makes it difficult to see on here but this is a tight zoom from a starnet image

 

Monkeyhead_Starnet_zooms.jpg

 

And this the same zoom on the same image from StarX

starless_MonkeyRC1_zooms.jpg

 

For me, in the few head to head comparison tests I ran last night, the improvement is remarkable over PI and Starnet++

 

Well done @rcroman !


  • Hobby Astronomer likes this

#20 mackiedlm

mackiedlm

    Messenger

  • -----
  • Posts: 466
  • Joined: 16 Jul 2019
  • Loc: Galway, Ireland

Posted 16 September 2021 - 03:50 AM

For ref this is the same crop before any star removal.

Monkeyhead_wStars_zooms.jpg

 

I guess the only negative from StarX is the removal of the small brighter nebula around the pair of stars in the upper right quadrant.


Edited by mackiedlm, 16 September 2021 - 03:54 AM.

  • Hobby Astronomer likes this

#21 Tayson82

Tayson82

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 290
  • Joined: 17 May 2018
  • Loc: Poland / Wolomin

Posted 16 September 2021 - 10:40 AM

Any idea??

ff.PNG



#22 rcroman

rcroman

    GradientXTerminator and StarShrink Author

  • -----
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 33
  • Joined: 03 Oct 2014

Posted 16 September 2021 - 10:50 AM

This is a known issue on some systems that I'm currently working on.

 

-Russ


  • Tayson82 likes this

#23 Hobby Astronomer

Hobby Astronomer

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,003
  • Joined: 18 Dec 2013
  • Loc: Texas

Posted 16 September 2021 - 01:25 PM

Russ,

 

The positive here is there is real demand for what you have created! Sorry we are pestering you.

 

Wish you the best of luck in working through all of the technical issues. I am ready to buy in the furture when it works with Affinity.

 

Very happy you have developed this.

 

HA


Edited by Hobby Astronomer, 16 September 2021 - 08:39 PM.

  • rcroman likes this

#24 james7ca

james7ca

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 10,031
  • Joined: 21 May 2011
  • Loc: San Diego, CA

Posted 16 September 2021 - 03:50 PM

I just posted an image where I used StarXTerminator to produce a starless version of the Cocoon Nebula in H-alpha which was then combined with a background image of the field stars taken with a red filter. The Cocoon itself had just under seven hour of integration time while the star field had less than three minutes of exposure.

 

Anyway, here is the link (on CN) where I've done my first "serious" image using StarXTerminator.

 

  https://www.cloudyni.../#entry11365922


  • Hobby Astronomer and rcroman like this

#25 Hobby Astronomer

Hobby Astronomer

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,003
  • Joined: 18 Dec 2013
  • Loc: Texas

Posted 16 September 2021 - 05:54 PM

James,

 

You nailed it there with the StarXTerminator!

 

CS!


Edited by Hobby Astronomer, 16 September 2021 - 05:55 PM.

  • ShortLobster likes this


CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.


Recent Topics






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics