19 replies to this topic

[rlmxracer]

I am in the market for my first windows computer since Windows 98 was a thing so I am not well versed in most basic windows tasks. What AP software is the most user friendly? 

Bonus question besides a big hard drive what specs should I look for in a budget minded laptop?

Thanks in advance. 

[TheStarsabove]

I am in the market for my first windows computer since Windows 98 was a thing so I am not well versed in most basic windows tasks. What AP software is the most user friendly? 

Bonus question besides a big hard drive what specs should I look for in a budget minded laptop?

Thanks in advance. 

Oh my, Windows 98??? Well, you have much to learn besides the processing programs O_O. I would say that StarTools is the easiest for beginners (it is $60, and Ivo is great!!!), and it is more flexible than most people give it credit for. I would get a 1TB-2TB NVMe SSD PC with at least 8C/16T (16 threads) and 16GB of ram (32GB is ideal). I would get a mini PC like this one. It seems pretty good, good enough for image stacking/processing! In fact, it is much like mine (I have an M2 with 24GB of RAM. but only 512GB of SSD ), and it works very smoothly.

[Son of Norway]

Concerning software for when you're just starting out, my recommendations would be: for stacking: Sequator or Deep Sky Stacker, for processing: Star Tools.

Edited by Son of Norway, 18 February 2025 - 03:13 PM.

[nou]

opensource SIRIL https://siril.org/

Edited by nou, 18 February 2025 - 03:23 PM.

[bobzeq25]

I am in the market for my first windows computer since Windows 98 was a thing so I am not well versed in most basic windows tasks. What AP software is the most user friendly? 
Bonus question besides a big hard drive what specs should I look for in a budget minded laptop?
Thanks in advance.

Two good choices.

Very Cheap. Deep Sky Stacker (required, free) plus Star Tools ($50). BE SURE to carefully study this page about how to set up DSS for use with StarTools. NEITHER program was designed to work with each other, and it's easy to have big problems.

https://www.startool...tacker-settings

Still pretty cheap. Astro Pixel Processor. $175. The additional money buys you a fully integrated, single program, that does everything. No need to worry about using two programs that were never designed to be used together, with different user interfaces to learn.

That would be my first choice for you. The website, and relevant comments from other people.

https://www.astropix...-owner-license/

"A HUGE second for AstroPixel Processor. Not only can it do everything you need as described in the last post, but it can do it SO much faster. I've used Photoshop for terrestrial photography, astrophotagraphy and imaging since version 2 (NOT CS2, the ORIGINAL version 2!) so I pretty much know my way around the software. Yet after starting with AstroPixel Processor a few months ago, I can do in 15 minutes semi-automatically what used to take hours doing by brute force in Photoshop. If you place any kind of value on your time, let alone the great results APP produces, it's a much better way to go."

"I bought APP, and WOW!, what a difference in image quality. After stacking with it, no more weird color gradients. I still need some practice in processing, but the starting image quality is MUCH better!! I am an official APP convert"

"Here's the result from APP (yes I know you guys using PI can do this stuff in your sleep but for us mere mortals this is much easier IMHO)."

"Wow, you weren't kidding when you said APP holds your hand."

"big breakthrough moments:

1) Going from Deep Sky Stacker to Astro Pixel Processor: Higher quality stacks, more robust to short exposures or small FOV/low star count data, good easy to use light pollution removal and star based color calibration."

For the laptop. Get a new one with Windows 11 Pro and a big screen. All these programs are pretty kind to less capable systems.

Edited by bobzeq25, 18 February 2025 - 03:44 PM.

[wkight]

I'm a big fan of Siril and if you use the basic scripts provided it can be relatively simple to use.  There are also a lot of supporting "how to" videos out there covering every aspect of the package.  Being free, you have nothing to lose by trying it.  

Another option that I have tinkered with is ASI Studio.  Also free, and has a very clean and simple user friendly interface. It doesn't have a ton of bells and whistles but it gets the job done.  Worth a try before spending money.  You can always buy stuff later once you get a feel for what works and what doesn't.  

To avoid frustration, check your local community college for an intro to windows course.  It will be a good refresher on the old, and intro to the new.  Such courses run a few weeks and aren't super expensive, sometime free for seniors if you qualify.

And lastly, since you mentioned "budget minded" I just picked up a refurbished Dell Optiplex 5050 (i7 processor) with a 512 GB internal SSD (important) and an external USB 1 TB passport for under $400.  Most importantly it has an nVidia GTX 1050 GPU.   No it isn't a top of the line PC but in my case, I was processing on an old Dell Laptop and it would take 45 to 60 minutes to denoise an image.  My new budget minded PC now does the same file in about 3 minutes.   The GPU makes the difference, not gobs and gobs of RAM (which does help if you can afford it) or super fast hard drives (which also help but they get expensive).   If you take the opportunity to go fetch a cup of coffee 3 minutes vs 30 seconds isn't so bad.

 

Good luck

[Avgvstvs]

Reconnect with Windows 11 first. Then things will become clearer. No one can tell you what will work.

[vidrazor]

For image capture, any old laptop will do. You can pick yourself up a used laptop (stay away from Chromebooks) and load it up with capture software like NINA or APT, and their support programs like ASTAP, PHD2, Stellarium, etc, and of course the ASCOM platform. APT is ~$20US, everything else is free. You can also install ready-to-go Linux astrophotography systems like Stellarmate and AstroArch on them as well. Stellarmate is $60US, AstroArch is free. There's loads of tutorials for NINA, APT and the KStars/Ekos software that Stellarmate and AstroArch work with. This is the system you will connect to your mount, imaging camera, and guide camera to control the shooting session to capture your image data and perform calibration frames.

 

For image processing the data you capture however, you need horsepower. I would get a pretty powerful desktop, skip the laptops for processing. Desktops can always be upgraded in processing power simply by getting a new and better graphics card, as the vast majority of processing software today takes advantage of the GPU for accelerated data processing. Get at least a mid-tier desktop with at least an 8 core processor and 32 gigs of ram minimum, with at least a 27 inch IPS monitor or larger. You can also calibrate IPS monitors with a calibration tool to help you get better color.

 

For processing software, I also suggest Siril. It's a free open source and powerful program that comes with ready-made scripts for various processes, and is growing by leaps and bounds. You will not outgrow it. At the time of this writing, Siril is also the fastest stacking program. You can find a basic tutorial for Siril here, and that particular channel has loads of additional tutorials on using all the tools in Siril.

Edited by vidrazor, 18 February 2025 - 04:32 PM.

[robbieg147]

I would give Deep Sky Stacker a miss and try Astro Pixel Processor almost foolproof.

 

For the computer try and get 32GB ram if you can, you don't need a massive SSD but you will need a large external SSD to transfer everything to as drives quickly fill up. Dell XPS laptops are good machines if within your budget, but there are many choices.

[NiteGuy]

First of all, for your particular situation, I'd highly recommend AVOIDING all dedicated astrophoto processing software. Those programs can be way too complex and difficult for beginners.

 

My recommendation is a super-easy-to-use piece of FREE software call FastStone 7.8. This software runs on any version of Windows and requires little to no hardware processing power. This will get you started quickly, easily, and cheaply but beware, it's a very, very steep climb up from here up to the various programs the best guys on CN use to process their images.

 

With FastStone, simply bring up your image and click on the "smiling sun" icon, then start playing with the 4 really easy and simple adjustments. Almost any image out-of-camera can be improved with FastStone. I've used it for 20+ years and still use it often for astrophotos to quickly get images close to what I'm aiming for or simply to see what's actually 'hidden' in an image and then I'll finish things up using more sophisticated programs or HDR processing. Many times, FastStone has been enough by itself to provide a nice, finished look to my image.

 

FastStone is also a great IMAGE VIEWER and can display a bit of EXIF data (date taken, camera, lens, focal length, etc.). Its many capabilities include cropping images (you can create custom sizes, I added a 3440x1440 pixel size to match my monitor), sharpening, leveling, rotating, side-by-side comparison, flipping vertical and horizontal, resizing, adding text to an image, convert to grayscale, negative, or sepia, adjust colors/levels, reduce noise, clone/heal retouching, saturation, brightness. It will also open RAW and JPEG files (many variations) plus many, many more file types.

 

Now, about your hardware questions. FastStone doesn't require much in the way of processing power and it will run on any laptop. Obviously, a faster processor and more RAM memory can't hurt. 16GB of RAM is all you'll need for Windows + FastStone but, if you want to future-proof your system, 32GB is recommended. As far as storage goes, skip the hard drive and go with an SSD (solid-state drive). Infinitely faster! 1TB should work for starters and that's low-cost enough that you can add a second one internally (best) or externally for backup. Down the road, you can add a removable hard drive with multiple Terabytes for cheap archival storage.

[rlmxracer]

Thanks for all the sage advice. I’m leaning towards Siril for a couple reasons one being that it’s free and second I happen to have a coworker that is also learning AP and how to use Siril. I have my eye on a refurbished laptop with some decent specs. 

[TelescopeGreg]

My vote is for ASTAP for stacking (easier to use than DSS), though DSS does a better job at removing satellite trails.  Both are free.  Also a strong vote for StarTools for the processing.  Besides its extremely reasonable purchase price, there's a time-unlimited trial license that you can use to get things settled at your pace, instead of the time pressure that the other licensed software has.

 

The big advantage of StarTools is that the "hard stuff" of image processing is baked into the software itself, instead of being required between the ears of the person running it.  Pretty fool-proof.  But if you're into image processing for image processing's sake, something like APT or Siril are probably a better choice, with a long-term goal of Pixinsight.  Pixinsight is an expensive tool, with a steep learning curve, but can produce amazing images in the hands of someone who really knows what they are doing.  Which direction you go is a significant choice that should be made relatively early; what you learn with one kind of tool isn't easily transferred to the other.  Unless you're already into image processing, I'd start with StarTools and the free trial license, to see if that appeals to you.  That's what I did, and I have very desire to move to anything else.

Edited by TelescopeGreg, 18 February 2025 - 11:40 PM.

[bobzeq25]

First of all, for your particular situation, I'd highly recommend AVOIDING all dedicated astrophoto processing software. Those programs can be way too complex and difficult for beginners.
 
My recommendation is a super-easy-to-use piece of FREE software call FastStone 7.8. This software runs on any version of Windows and requires little to no hardware processing power. This will get you started quickly, easily, and cheaply but beware, it's a very, very steep climb up from here up to the various programs the best guys on CN use to process their images.
 
With FastStone, simply bring up your image and click on the "smiling sun" icon, then start playing with the 4 really easy and simple adjustments. Almost any image out-of-camera can be improved with FastStone. I've used it for 20+ years and still use it often for astrophotos to quickly get images close to what I'm aiming for or simply to see what's actually 'hidden' in an image and then I'll finish things up using more sophisticated programs or HDR processing. Many times, FastStone has been enough by itself to provide a nice, finished look to my image.
 
FastStone is also a great IMAGE VIEWER and can display a bit of EXIF data (date taken, camera, lens, focal length, etc.). Its many capabilities include cropping images (you can create custom sizes, I added a 3440x1440 pixel size to match my monitor), sharpening, leveling, rotating, side-by-side comparison, flipping vertical and horizontal, resizing, adding text to an image, convert to grayscale, negative, or sepia, adjust colors/levels, reduce noise, clone/heal retouching, saturation, brightness. It will also open RAW and JPEG files (many variations) plus many, many more file types.
 
Now, about your hardware questions. FastStone doesn't require much in the way of processing power and it will run on any laptop. Obviously, a faster processor and more RAM memory can't hurt. 16GB of RAM is all you'll need for Windows + FastStone but, if you want to future-proof your system, 32GB is recommended. As far as storage goes, skip the hard drive and go with an SSD (solid-state drive). Infinitely faster! 1TB should work for starters and that's low-cost enough that you can add a second one internally (best) or externally for backup. Down the road, you can add a removable hard drive with multiple Terabytes for cheap archival storage.

I don't understand this at all. You seem to be talking about a single snapshot. Which is not how DSS imaging is done. You take multiple "lights". Calibrate them with bias, flats, and darks. Then stack the calibrated lights. Then process the stack.

Doing that with a terrestrial photoediting program is extremely difficult. An astro specific program makes it MUCH easier.

If you are talking about using DSS to create a stack, and FastStone to process it, that's similar to my first option above, DSS plus Star Tools. StarTools, for astrophotography, is just as easy to use as FastStone, and can create significantly better images, since it's optimized for astrophotography. I've used both programs. StarTools also provides tools such as gradient reduction to combat light pollution, which is a serious problem for the large majority of imagers.

Bottom line. Astrophotography is a completely different thing than terrestrial photography. Terrestrial photoediting programs are ill suited.

This is someone who figured that out.

"I've used Photoshop for terrestrial photography, astrophotography and imaging since version 2 (NOT CS2, the ORIGINAL version 2!) so I pretty much know my way around the software. Yet after starting with AstroPixel Processor a few months ago, I can do in 15 minutes semi-automatically what used to take hours doing by brute force in Photoshop."

As far as astrospecific programs being difficult, some are, some are not.

"Here's the result from APP (yes I know you guys using PI can do this stuff in your sleep but for us mere mortals this is much easier IMHO)." StarTools is even easier than APP. But you have to use it carefully with DSS.

Minor point. I have FastStone experience. When I was first starting out (10+ years ago) I'd use FastStone to examine individual subs. These days I use astro specific programs for that too, FastStone had severe limitations.

Edited by bobzeq25, 19 February 2025 - 01:30 AM.

[NiteGuy]

I don't understand this at all. You seem to be talking about a single snapshot. Which is not how DSS imaging is done. You take multiple "lights". Calibrate them with bias, flats, and darks. Then stack the calibrated lights. Then process the stack.

Doing that with a terrestrial photoediting program is extremely difficult. An astro specific program makes it MUCH easier.

If you are talking about using DSS to create a stack, and FastStone to process it, that's similar to my first option above, DSS plus Star Tools. StarTools, for astrophotography, is just as easy to use as FastStone, and can create significantly better images, since it's optimized for astrophotography. I've used both programs. StarTools also provides tools such as gradient reduction to combat light pollution, which is a serious problem for the large majority of imagers.

Bottom line. Astrophotography is a completely different thing than terrestrial photography. Terrestrial photoediting programs are ill suited.

This is someone who figured that out.

"I've used Photoshop for terrestrial photography, astrophotography and imaging since version 2 (NOT CS2, the ORIGINAL version 2!) so I pretty much know my way around the software. Yet after starting with AstroPixel Processor a few months ago, I can do in 15 minutes semi-automatically what used to take hours doing by brute force in Photoshop."

As far as astrospecific programs being difficult, some are, some are not.

"Here's the result from APP (yes I know you guys using PI can do this stuff in your sleep but for us mere mortals this is much easier IMHO)." StarTools is even easier than APP. But you have to use it carefully with DSS.

Minor point. I have FastStone experience. When I was first starting out (10+ years ago) I'd use FastStone to examine individual subs. These days I use astro specific programs for that too, FastStone had severe limitations.

Yes, you're absolutely right about everything. My thinking was that, for someone just starting out with no post-processing experience, it would be better to wade-in slowly and get used to using an editing/processing program with single frames. To throw the whole astrophotography kitchen sink at someone all at once is pretty overwhelming, even if they have someone to help them. A recent CN poster aptly described astrophotography as being like taking 3 college-level computer science courses all at once! At least with FastStone there's almost no learning curve, it's intuitive, and you get results in just a few minutes. Get a little comfortable, build some confidence, then take things up a notch and start stacking like crazy!

[ayadai]

I'll pitch in with SIRIL as well. Reasonably easy to use, produces good results, lots of great tutorials available and a very wide user base here and elsewhere to provide advice when you need it. And it's free.

[EdDixon]

Windows 98 does go back a ways (I still have systems here that can boot WIn95).  Your gallery shows you already have some results in DSO, so clearly have already moved forward some.

 

For any kind of AP, I like to distinguish what is used at the scope and what is used later for post processing.  The two are very different.  I use a miniPC at the scope for all control and capture processing.  Almost any miniPC will do as the processing requirements are light.

 

I use removable SSDs for capture and image storage.  This makes moving the data to a post processing system later much easier.

 

I do almost all of my imaging from inside.  At home it's in the dining room and when remote inside the car.  I use a small WiFi router to connect to the scope.  I can go out about 75 feet and still have quite good performance.

 

For post processing I use a high end desktop.  Desktops here are usually better as it's easier to get the memory you need, processing horsepower, and separate graphics cards (for software than can use that).  Laptops can work here, but the smaller screen is a factor for those of us who are older.

 

There is a lot of different software for AP.  While I started out with StarTools, I found it too limiting.  Today I use Pixinsight (which does have a learning curve) and a few add-ons for it.  I tend to use a combination of Windows and MacOS for final polishing.  I also use GIMP (which is free) for some things.

 

AutoStakkert is a good free stacking tool.  I also use RegiStax, which is older, but still works great!.  I use SharpCap Pro for all my capture processing.  It does well for both DSO and Planetary.

 

PIPP is a great tool for dealing with SER files from Planetary… to separate the wheat from the chaff…so to speak.  Stellarium is also a great free tool for planning your sessions ahead of time.  It helps with field of view for various scope/camera combos.

[rlmxracer]

Windows 98 does go back a ways (I still have systems here that can boot WIn95).  Your gallery shows you already have some results in DSO, so clearly have already moved forward some.

 

For any kind of AP, I like to distinguish what is used at the scope and what is used later for post processing.  The two are very different.  I use a miniPC at the scope for all control and capture processing.  Almost any miniPC will do as the processing requirements are light.

 

I use removable SSDs for capture and image storage.  This makes moving the data to a post processing system later much easier.

 

I do almost all of my imaging from inside.  At home it's in the dining room and when remote inside the car.  I use a small WiFi router to connect to the scope.  I can go out about 75 feet and still have quite good performance.

 

For post processing I use a high end desktop.  Desktops here are usually better as it's easier to get the memory you need, processing horsepower, and separate graphics cards (for software than can use that).  Laptops can work here, but the smaller screen is a factor for those of us who are older.

 

There is a lot of different software for AP.  While I started out with StarTools, I found it too limiting.  Today I use Pixinsight (which does have a learning curve) and a few add-ons for it.  I tend to use a combination of Windows and MacOS for final polishing.  I also use GIMP (which is free) for some things.

 

AutoStakkert is a good free stacking tool.  I also use RegiStax, which is older, but still works great!.  I use SharpCap Pro for all my capture processing.  It does well for both DSO and Planetary.

 

PIPP is a great tool for dealing with SER files from Planetary… to separate the wheat from the chaff…so to speak.  Stellarium is also a great free tool for planning your sessions ahead of time.  It helps with field of view for various scope/camera combos.

The photo of M42 and IC434 HH neb were live stacked in ASIair and the shot of NGC 2359 was my first attempt to stack using the built in DSO stacking tool. I'm sure I will be able to figure it out once I get a computer. Thanks for the advice. 

[bobzeq25]

Yes, you're absolutely right about everything. My thinking was that, for someone just starting out with no post-processing experience, it would be better to wade-in slowly and get used to using an editing/processing program with single frames. To throw the whole astrophotography kitchen sink at someone all at once is pretty overwhelming, even if they have someone to help them. A recent CN poster aptly described astrophotography as being like taking 3 college-level computer science courses all at once! At least with FastStone there's almost no learning curve, it's intuitive, and you get results in just a few minutes. Get a little comfortable, build some confidence, then take things up a notch and start stacking like crazy!

Just won't work. Not enough total imaging time. To get anything even halfway decent the imager should have at least one hour of data.

Hundreds of people have started out successfully with calibration of lights, and stacking. It's just not that hard.

Edited by bobzeq25, 20 February 2025 - 12:17 AM.

[tuxtex]

I wonder why nobody voted for Seti Astro Suite together with Cosmic Clarity:

 

https://www.setiastr...os-editng-suite

 

Franklin makes a great job to develop interesting functionalities quickly.

 

That said, I strongly recommend Siril as well together with Graxpert, Starnet++ and Gimp.

 

Clear Skies,

 

Guenther

[gordtulloch]

Thanks for all the sage advice. I’m leaning towards Siril for a couple reasons one being that it’s free and second I happen to have a coworker that is also learning AP and how to use Siril. I have my eye on a refurbished laptop with some decent specs. 

Siril with Sirilic is pretty decent, very close to AstroPixelProcessor in convenience for setting up multi-session / multi-filter stacking. The processing features work pretty well. That being said, I use APP but if Siril had been up to it's current standard when I looked at APP I likely would have stuck with Siril.