This is not a perfect solution, but you can compensate for the banding in Photoshop/Affinity Photo by dropping in a layer with a solid color of the banding at the brightest banding luminosity, then change that layer transform to lighten. The make a copy of the original layer and merge them. Then use a levels adjustment layer to drop the density back down with the black point while also opening up the gamma (midpoint). Adjust to taste.
This is easier done if you separate your stars and apply it to a copy of the starless layer. Below are two examples of what I'm depicting. The first is the effect applied to the dark sample plate (which you don't apply it too, it's here just for example). The second is the effect applied to a starless layer, and then levels adjusted to darken the skies and open up the galaxy data. Then the stars are merged back in. How dark you want the skies is of course personal taste, I like mine dark :-)
That looks like a pretty good solution, I don’t have Photoshop or Affinity but I do use GIMP occasionally and it should be possible to do in there. I will give it a try today when I have the chance.
I do personally like my skies dark as well (sometimes I will have it lighter though, depending on what was imaged)
Thank you for helping
No worries at all, mate.
Dithering won't remove the large-structure bands, but temperature matching is very helpful. It also helps to let the camera do an hour of temperature soak at ambient to prevent too steep of a change. (Not much you can do if the night temperature changes drastically.)
The next-level matching is trying to match the actual temperature curve of the lights. The ideal match would be with an alternating light-dark-light-dark… capture sequence. But if you plot out the temperatures of your darks, you might find you have a set that has roughly the same temperature profile (possibly in reverse):
I find for my 600D, my darks converge in about 20 minutes, so for matching I select the 20-minute part of the curve that best matches the lights.
That said, I find that in high light pollution (Bortle 6/7) I still get better results when I capture at set the end of the session than pulling from my darks library.
That sounds like a good idea, I usually temperature soak for about half an hour but upping it to an hour could help.
I get what you mean with the temperature curves, it sounds like it would be very useful. I may be able to plot a few curves based off of some of my pre-existing image sets and ambient temperatures that I recorded at the time.
The light pollution part might be okay, in a Bortle 5/6 area but has some darker spots which can help.
It's the Canon camera. Canon cameras do that. There is a banding script in Pixinsight that helps remove them. Sirill also has a script to remove that banding which I actually think is better at removing it.
I have heard that some canon cameras are bad for it especially at higher temperatures, didn’t think it may also be effecting the newer mirrorless ones.