Astrophotography

Hello,
I've just loaded for trial Photoshop CC 64 bits but unable to open astrophotography images from my CCD camera with FITS extension as in other PS version even in adding Fitsplug file in the plug-ins directory. Is it an Apps for these files specific to Astronomy?
Regards

Hello,
I've checked that the basic file Fitsplug.8bi works with PS CC 32-bit. The editor cannot ensure that the last V2 version Fitsplug2.8bi is suitable for PS CC 64-bit as this is untested. He intend to look but will be surprised that the CC architecture is different of the previous and suitable CS 64-bit.
Regards

Similar Messages

  • Remote Camera Control and astrophotography for Sony A7(X) and Sony A6000

    Hello, Sony makes the best sensors, no doubt about it. Sony makes the best hybryd cameras, that's why i bought a Sony camera BUT ... Astrophotographers are deeply looking at Sony 's camera (especially A7S) because of their astrophotography capabilities but there is a HUGE problem : no software allow BULB mode command, which is very important for astrophotographers. Most of time, astrophotography is some thing like that : 30 pictures, 5 minutes exposure for each picture and we have to add dark frames, flat frames, offset frames and so on. So, if Sony makes a software like Remote Camera Control, why does Sony not include long exposure (over 30s) control in this software ? So come on Mr Sony, don't let Canon leading astrophotographers. Please, add long exposure in your softwares !! Many thanks considering my demand.

    I'm going to add that this should be available for ANY alpha series camera that has a bulb mode function in manual control.   This includes ,for example, the a5100.

  • Astrophotography - need help with photoshop

    Hello all,
    I'm trying to learn how to do low-light night photography, including some astrophotography.  I bought an intervalometer and just collected 100 photos.  Using Bridge I load all 100 into Photoshop layers.  It took a fairly long time (several minutes) to load, but is it seems they all loaded correctly.  The problem is now whenever I do anything in Photoshop I get an error message saying there's not enough RAM.  Also, everything else on the computer slows way down.  I went to PS preferences and upped the RAM to the max I have available, 3.3 Gb.  Didn't help. 
    I'm taking all the shots as RAW files.  Should I be shooting JPEGs instead?  Do I just need more RAM?  3.3 Gb seems like it should be enough.
    Any suggestions.
    I'm using a Canon 40D, CS6, and a Mac Mini running OSX 10.8.4.
    Thanks,
    Kevin H.

    Should I be shooting JPEGs instead? 
    Not if you value image quality.
    In any case once the image is a layer in a layered Photoshop file the original compression is moot.
    What is the images’ size in pixels?
    Did you stack the images as Smart Objects or straight Layers?
    Could you please post a screenshot with the Layers Panel visible?
    For advice on Photoshop performance in general check out
    http://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/kb/optimize-performance-photoshop-cs4-cs5.html

  • Photoshop CS6 Photomerge for astrophotography

    I have been have been unsuccessful using photomerge to stitch 3 shot panoramas of the night sky (milky way and stars only) with manual settings, using a tilt shift lens with plenty of overlap.  Perhaps the part of the problem is that the photos have little detail due to the fact that they just consist of relatively black sky and white and colored stars. My 3 shot landscape panoramas using photomerge works fine.  I could manually merge the photos by combining images using transparent layers to line up the images but was wondering if there was some settings in photomerge that could help me automate the stitching process?   Thanks!  Bill

    Just curious, but have you tried Microsoft's Image Composit Editor (ICE)? It's free and worth a try.
    http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/redmond/groups/ivm/ice/

  • ISight camera exposure time control for astrophotography

    Does anyone know of a way, or an application that allows you to control the shutter speed/exposure time when taking a photo with an external iSight camera?
    I am trying to adapt an external iSight camera for astro-photography.  There are some excellent tutorials on how to remove the optics to expose the ccd, here.  However for certain imaging you need long exposure shots like one could achieve with a DSLR.  iGlasses is great for some control, but according to their customer support, does not allow control of the exposure time.
    For other webcams there are suggested physical modifications including the use of a soldering iron!  I am hoping that someone will be able to point me in the direction of a more elegant software solution!  Most astronomy forum users recommend getting a netbook; I can't believe that this isn't something that a mac cannot do better!
    Hope that some of you out there who know much more than I do can help out.
    Many thanks,
    Phil

    Not for what you are trying to do.
    I don't use anything like you seek, but http://www.outcastsoft.com/ASCASTROIIDC.html offers OS X software for compatible IIDC cameras (other than external iSight.)  According to their site:
    ... Apple's FireWire iSight will never be supported as it lacks IIDC modes we need and is not capable of doing extended CCD exposure times. ...
    If that is accurate, your Mac/OS X choices include acquiring:
    (1) a supported IIDC camera,
    (2) a UVC webcam that can work with something like
         http://www.phoboslab.org/log/2009/07/uvc-camera-control-for-mac-os-x
    (3) or  a DSLR that offers Mac OS X compatible software for the features you need.
    If none of those are acceptable within your needed timeframe, my only remaining suggestion would be to find software that does what you want and then buy whatever camera and computer is compatible with it.
    Message was edited by: EZ Jim
    Mac OSX 10.7.3

  • Upgrade from 8.6 to 9.2

    Hey there
    I have an old 'clam shell' iBook that has 8.6 and I want to upgrade it to 9.2 so I can use it outside for astrophotography. Everytime I try to install the 9.2 I get a message "This version of Mac OS can not be installed over the localized version of Mac OS on the disc named 'Harddrive'". What the heck does that mean?
    Thanks!
    Pete

    Hi, cosmictones -
    The "localized version" message indicates the language version of the OS on the hard drive does not match the language version of the OS to be installed from the CD. Installing OS 9 on top of a previous version, whether using a full-install CD or an appropriate-version download update, requires that the language versions of the two match.
    OS 9 Install CDs do not contain more than one language version.
    For this purpose, North American English and International English are not treated as being the same langauge. To make it worse, some older OS versions, such as OS 8.x versions, came in a third choice, British English. This last choice was removed starting with OS 9, as I recall.
    Solutions -
    • Get a replacement CD, one whose language version matches that of the installed OS 8.6, and use it.
    -or-
    • Use the CD you have and do a Clean Install of the OS. Note that a Clean Insyall does not remove anything; it installs a brand new, 'clean' System Folder in its version, renames the old one to Previous System Folder, installs a new set of standard utilities, and does little else.
    Article #58176 - Mac OS 8, Mac OS 9: Performing a Clean Installation
    In this instance I would recommend doing a Clean Install. Doing so will not only save time and money, it will give a better install - there will be no risk of old OS 8 files accidentally not getting removed by the installer, and lingering around to interfere with the new OS.

  • Cant Access windows 8 after upgrading to mountain lion

    a few weeks ago i upgraded my lion to mountain lion
    i had windows 8 installed with boot camp on a seperate partition (i only use windows 8 for my astrophotography as certain specilised apps i use are sadly windows only)
    now as i hadnt had any clear skys upuntill a few nights ago i hadnt needed to go into my windows 8 (and hadnt noticed its disapearence till now)    althrough looking on my mac i can see all trace of it even existing has gone (apart from the fact my hard drive (250gig) is still showing the split 189 gig (windows being 61)
    just tried the windows 8 disk see if i can recover it and it told me the partition is locked and needs to be unlocked
    im not bothered about anything on the windows side (to the point i tried to use bootcamp to wipe it and start again) but it says you need more than 10gig free (i had 13 at the time)  and wont let me go to the setting for deleting ect only as far as downloading the bootcamp drivers.
    so does any one have any ideas how to recover, unlock or even to get rid of and start it again without effecting my mac partition as i dont have enough space to back everything up (and im not currently financially able to buy another hard drive just for that purpose.)
    many thanks in advance
    Gareth

    well iv just managed to get to 35 gig free (just deleting iphone backups) and im now able to get past the next screen on bootcamp.
    unfortunatly its only allowing me to create a new partition not delete the current.
    this is leading me to think the old ones master partition has become damaged and the hard drive dosent know it exists any more.
    if this is the case (please tell me im wrong though) what options do i have as i dont want to / have the money to buy another hard drive to back everything up to it with.
    thanks again
    gareth

  • Shutter count question

    Does anyone in the forum know how I can determine the shutter count I have logged on my T3i? The camera is still going strong without any problems at all (except for a few dead pixels that appear as tiny red spots in some images). I am mostly just curious about this. Is there any indication how many shutter releases the average T3i can be expected to fire? My T3i is my first dslr and it has served that role fabulously.

    As Tim mentioned, there's Shuttercount.  But many other programs (that many camera owners already have) can give you the count as well.  If all you want is the count then Shuttercount is probably the easiest, but it's good to have options:
    Magic Lantern: Third party add-on for your camera.  Free, but you install a firmware add-on onto your camera.  Best to know what you're doing before installing.  Again, if you just want the count there are better options.
    DSLR Controller: An app for controlling your camera from a smart phone or tablet.  Fantastic app, but it costs $10.  I wouldn't spend it for just count, but the app itself is awesome if you want to control your camera remotely.
    FoCal: A program for fine tuning your cameras autofocus.  Unfortunately doesn't work with your camera, but most people who have fine-tunable cameras already own this so I thought I'd mention it.
    APT: An astrophotography tool.  There's a free trial for download that should tell you shutter count.  Can't say I've tried it.

  • Aspiring photographer.

    Looking to buy a camera for my trip to Europe this summer and I've narrowed my options to the EOS 6D, 7D Mark II, 7D, 70 D, and 60 Da. Which one is the best suit, please provide your reasoning behind your choice.

    Hopefully you've permanently scratched the 60Da off your list.  The "a" stands for "astrophotography" and it's a special-purpose camera with a modified IR cut filter to allow vastly more reds (specially they're going after the Hydrogen alpha band at about 656nm).  While the camera can still attach normal lenses and be used like any other camera, you'd notice ever image is is very strong in reds.
    The 6D and 7D II are VERY different cameras. 
    The 7D II is an APS-C sensor camera, but in every other respect it's a pro body.  It's very durable.  It's heavily optimized for action photography.  It also has a very sophisticated auto-focus system which is not necessarily intuitive.  Anyone buying such a camera really sould plan to sit down and go through it's features and especially spend some time understanding the focus system.  I do know of at least one person who owns a 5D III (which has nearly the same focus system) and was surprised to learn they pretty much found a way to get the camera to use a single center point and have never changed modes... ever.  They admitted it's because they don't understand the focus system.  I pointed them to the docs & videos on it (Canon has a special document on just the focus system.) 
    I think I'd love a 7D II... but if you're looking for a camera that can be used by a casual user... the 7D II might be a bit much.
    And then there's the 6D.
    The 6D has extremely good ISO performance and a focus system that can focus down to -3 EV.  It's an outstanding camera if you have to shoot in low light.  The focus system is relatively simple... it has an 11 point system which very strongly resembles the system you'd find on the Rebel bodies.  The focus system is friendlier toward casual shooting and this is considered an "entry" full-frame body (but "entry" for full frame is still very high end).  
    But it is also a "full frame" camera so you can't use the EF-S  lenses (those only work on crop-frame sensor bodies).  This means every lens you use will have a wider angle of view as compared to an APS-C crop-frame sensor body (like a 7D II).  It's also able to generate stronger background blur (full frame cameras naturally have a narrower depth of field.)  
    This makes the 6D a better camera for things like (a) low light, (b) portraiture, (c) landscape, (d) architecture (especially interiors).  But it would be a worse camera for sports & wildlife (action photography).
    Tim Campbell
    5D II, 5D III, 60Da

  • Colour management help needed?!

    Hi everyone,
    I'll soon be getting some of my images made into a photography book by a large and reputable printing company. They have just sent me their ICC profiles for me to use when I edit the photos for the book.
    What exactly do I need to do in order to make what I see on the screen identical (or very close to) what my printed books will look like? I will be provided with proofs before the books are printed but would like to get colour management right the first time around.
    I edit my images using Photoshop CS5, mainly in camera raw.
    If anyone could provide me with the steps required it would be greatly appreciated!
    Many thanks,
    Poppy
    P.S. I recently got given a spyder calibration device but have never used it, don't know if this needs to be involved in the colour management process somehow?

    function(){return A.apply(null,[this].concat($A(arguments)))}
    PoppyAG wrote:
    If anyone could provide me with the steps required it would be greatly appreciated!
    How did they describe the profiles given to you?  What are their names?
    This is not really a subject someone can just lay out for you in a forum post.  It's complicated to get things set up right, and the choices you need to make during setup require both understanding of the concepts AND of your needs.  There are few cases where without knowing your needs someone could just say "the right way to set it is this".  You need to go seek out all the information you can find about color management and read it, then come to a place like this with specific questions.  There are quite a few overviews online, but understand this while you're reading:  Not everyone who writes on the web really understands it either, so you'll have to keep in mind that some of the info you find is going to be just plain wrong, even though it sounds right.
    function(){return A.apply(null,[this].concat($A(arguments)))}
    PoppyAG wrote:
    What exactly do I need to do in order to make what I see on the screen identical (or very close to) what my printed books will look like? I will be provided with proofs before the books are printed
    Inevitably the schedule will get crunched, and they'll suggest that the physical proof review can be skipped.
    ABSOLUTELY, POSITIVELY DON'T LET THEM GET AWAY WITH SKIPPING THE PROOF REVIEW.
    In a recent book of astrophotography I did the printing came out too dark, because for all my color management knowledge and proper setup, someone without the proper knowledge at the printing contractor didn't handle the files properly, and because of the editor's stupidity they both caused the schedule to slip and requested that we make up time by skipping the paper review - and like an idiot I let them.  As a result the images are just interesting rather than spectacular, and book sales suffered.
    -Noel

  • Fits plug in for PS CC

    Hello
    I want to use PS CC exclus,ivly for astrophotography, for that , the file format use is FITS 16 or 32 or IEET , before with CS3 we used fits liberator and after downloading , it was easy to use it , in plugin/ file format
    but now  I have a lot of diificulties to open this file.
    Have you got solutions please
    Best whishes and thanks for your answer
    Jean Olivier

    I believe the FITS Liberator 3 is a standalone application now, so maybe you can open your old files into it and output them as tiffs to open in photoshop cc
    http://www.spacetelescope.org/projects/fits_liberator/

  • Lens Profile Creator and Astronomical Telescopes

    I'm interested in using the Lens Profile Creator with astronomical telescopes for astrophotography. Using the checkerboard to create a profile would be problematic because you can't come to focus on close objects and really need to be focused at infinity (many miles) for the optics to have the same characteristics used in astrophotography. But one can image other "dense" but not geometrically regular targets. Dense starfields in the Milky Way for example. So there may be a workaround.
    Is this an appropriate place to discuss this use?
    If not, point me elsewhere. I have heard that some at Adobe are working on astrophotography uses for Photoshop and this particular app (or something like it) would be very useful to us.
    Drew S.

    There are a number of things darks/flats/bias can't remove: curvature, coma, pincushion, chromatic aberration. Some of those (pincushion i.e. showing stars on the chip in a slightly different position from their true position) may or may not be correctable with this sort of an app. It's possible using outside data (comparing the star locations in the image to their true locations in a catalog - that's a common astrophotography measurement and only takes seconds). Correcting curvature (differing focus off axis) chromatic aberration and coma (distorted star shape off axis) seem just what this app is about.
    Printing a checkerboard on a nearby hill top sounds involved. Maybe I could get them to plough it in a regular pattern? :-)
    The camera does not capture the data you mention. The images are usually in FITS format which has an enormous amount of data about the focal length, exposure time, amount of atmosphere through which you are looking, etc.
    Calculating from the book value for the lens(es) camera chip etc would likely not be give a better result than the value obtained before correction. In some designs of scopes, particularly the most common ones, the focal length changes as you focus for example. The lenses and mirrors, comparing one scope to the next, are not perfectly identical.
    But a dense star field would be something against which you could measure changes in star shape, focus, chromatic aberration and possibly even position. Once you figured out the parameters for your particular scope+corrector lenses+camera setup you could then use that profile thereafter.
    I'd love to chat with that engineer  I had heard you have one person who got a Meade SCT and started astroimaging just to learn the things we need and most astroimagers do use photoshop.
    Drew S.

  • 7D Mark II missing a simple feature from the 70D and Rebels

    Please add, by firmware update, the 3x digital zoom (1:1 pixels, really 2.875x) in video feature present in the 70D and many of the Rebel cameras. I can attest to its usefulness from my use of it in my T2i. It's useful for astrophotography, specifically planetary astrophotography where large stacks of video frames are used to create a much better still than can be made any other way. It can also greatly extend the usefulness of a lens like the 18-135STM which would reach 135*1.6*2.875=621mm equivalent without the need to upscale. Finally, it would add the ability to take videos of, say, birds that are of the same resolution (resolving power, not pixel dimensions) as can be obtained from stills.
    Ideally, it would be possible to smoothly zoom from full-frame to 1:1 and back using buttons on the back of the camera while shooting is in progress, but even the awkward menu item as it is implemented in the other cameras would be preferable to not having the feature at all.
    Further, if it could be implemented while retaining dual pixel focusing (which the 70D does not) that would extend its usefulness even further to moving objects from stationary objects only.
    The 7D2 looks to be a spectacular camera with a powerful feature set, which makes it all the more odd that this feature was left out.
    Thank you.

    Digital zoom is not really zoom, it is in camera crop then enlarge which can be done in post process. It is considered gimmick for consumer market so you will not likely to find it in pro-targeted camera. Same thing with why you do not find those automatic shooting modes on pro camera. Thus, i think you will never see it implemented.
    Weekend Travelers Blog | Eastern Sierra Fall Color Guide

  • Moving and Tilting the Camera for an optimum Lens Profile Creator image set

    When framing the chart in different areas of the image frame, use a combination of physically moving and tilting the camera to achieve an optimal balance for LCP generation.
    The following two passages are from the AdobeLensProfileCreatorCalibrationChartShhtingGuide.pdf
    Page11/a -Move camera a bit to the left (so that when turning to the right to face the chart, it is about 10 to 30 degrees). Take a series of shots similar to the first three, above, except that the chart is framed at the center-left, top-left, and bottom-left areas of the image.
    v. Move camera to the right, and do the same for the center-right, top-right, and bottom-right areas of the image
    pg11/e - When framing the chart in different areas of the image frame, use a combination of physically moving and tilting the camera to achieve an optimal balance for LCP generation.
    i. Only moving the camera to frame, so that image plane stays perfectly parallel to the chart, can have an adverse affect on LCP calibration data.
    ii. Only tilting the chart may cause depth-of-field issues, where part of the chart may go too far out of focus due to the large angle of the chart in regards to the image plane. This can also have an adverse affect on LCP calibration data.
    Does this mean to center the camera with the center/center shot so that the film plane is parallel with the calibration grid, then only use camera tilt on the tripod up and down for the top center an bottom center image. Then move the camera/tripod left (so that when turning to the right to face the chart, it is about 10 to 30 degrees) AND also pan the camera left to shoot the left top center and bottom image.
    I think this combination of instructions have me stuck. Move left but not so much that the calibration target image is parallel with the film plane then pan the camera to get the desired framing.
    Would I be correct to say - move left until the angel to the calibration image is 10-30 degrees and then use camera pan on the tripod to get the image framed properly. ... Is the desire to move as little as possible, or pan as little as possible, or to balance moving and panning in some way. 
    I am profiling a Nikon D7000/TAMRON 11-18mm F/4.5-5.6 lens and have a large target 36"x48" and read that I should shoot at minimum focus distance, 3x minimum, and 5x minimum which equates to 9.8 inches, 29.4 inches and 49 inches... I use this combo to shoot home interior shots at an focal distance of more like 10-20 feet from surrounding walls.. would I also need shots at (120 inches?) 10 feet?
    I really (really) want to get the distance to subject and camera moving/pan combination right.
    Please help. 

    There are a number of things darks/flats/bias can't remove: curvature, coma, pincushion, chromatic aberration. Some of those (pincushion i.e. showing stars on the chip in a slightly different position from their true position) may or may not be correctable with this sort of an app. It's possible using outside data (comparing the star locations in the image to their true locations in a catalog - that's a common astrophotography measurement and only takes seconds). Correcting curvature (differing focus off axis) chromatic aberration and coma (distorted star shape off axis) seem just what this app is about.
    Printing a checkerboard on a nearby hill top sounds involved. Maybe I could get them to plough it in a regular pattern? :-)
    The camera does not capture the data you mention. The images are usually in FITS format which has an enormous amount of data about the focal length, exposure time, amount of atmosphere through which you are looking, etc.
    Calculating from the book value for the lens(es) camera chip etc would likely not be give a better result than the value obtained before correction. In some designs of scopes, particularly the most common ones, the focal length changes as you focus for example. The lenses and mirrors, comparing one scope to the next, are not perfectly identical.
    But a dense star field would be something against which you could measure changes in star shape, focus, chromatic aberration and possibly even position. Once you figured out the parameters for your particular scope+corrector lenses+camera setup you could then use that profile thereafter.
    I'd love to chat with that engineer  I had heard you have one person who got a Meade SCT and started astroimaging just to learn the things we need and most astroimagers do use photoshop.
    Drew S.

  • Layer mask advise

    I use Photoshop CC for astrophotography processing, I have watched a number of tutorials for this but they all seem to be on older versions of Photoshop, I am having problems adapting the information in to Photoshop CC.
    One example is the following video, where he copies the background and then adds some curves and levels the ordinal background is not affected so able to use a layer mask to bring through the darker colour from the ordinal background and so on.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K-PC4Sq ... e=youtu.be
    When i have tried to do this on CC it doesn't work all levels are effected and i am no able to bring any darker colours out so when i am processing M31 the core gets very blown out
    Can anyone advise or point me to where I can get an older version of Photoshop ???

    The link to the video doesn't seem to work.
    Which operating system are you using?

Maybe you are looking for