Live stacking - info needed

Discussion of using SharpCap for Deep Sky Imaging
Post Reply
Moonstruck
Posts: 112
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2021 4:34 pm

Live stacking - info needed

#1

Post by Moonstruck »

I am new to astrophotography, and amateur astronomy in general. I have a CPC 800 HD Edge telescope with a go-to alt-az mount, and an ASI 224 MC color camera. I have mostly only used my telescope and camera for planetary photography so far, and have been using the "capture" function in Sharpcap. I would now like to use my telescope/camera for deep sky imaging. I heard that for deep sky imaging, the "live stacking" function should be used in sharpcap, and will result in better photos. I have some questions on live stacking:

1. How does live stacking differ from the usual "capture" function I have been using? How/why is live stacking better for deep sky photography?
2. Is there a user-friendly tutorial I can watch that will step me through the process of using live stacking? If so, can you please provide a link?
3. In your opinion, does live stacking result in better pictures than are possible with using the capture function?
4. After using live stacking, do I still need to use autostakkert or another stacking program when I process the photos? Or can I use the Registax wavelet function right after live stacking?

Thanks very much.
User avatar
admin
Site Admin
Posts: 13177
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2017 3:52 pm
Location: Vale of the White Horse, UK
Contact:

Re: Live stacking - info needed

#2

Post by admin »

Hi,

the difference with the live stacking function is that instead of needing to run a separate stacking application after capturing to stack the images, the stacking (including alignment, dark and flat correction if selected, colour balance, stretch and some noise reduction/sharpening) happen in real time as the images are being captured. What you see with live stacking will be much better than a single image from your camera, and much easier than using standard capture and a separate stacking application.

Now, if you capture images using the normal capture function, then stack them all using Deep Sky Stacker or PixInsight or similar, you may well be able to get a better final image than live stacking gives for the same captures - but is it worth the extra effort? For some people the answer is yes, for others no...

You can find lots of people who record their live stacking sessions and explain what they are doing - just search 'SharpCap Live stacking' on YouTube. People's tastes about tutorials vary so much that it is hard to recommend individual ones, since what is great for one person may be too simple or too advanced for another.

You can certainly use other software to further process the image that live stacking has produced - for instance to apply more noise reduction, colour balancing, stretching or sharpening. There is no need for a stacking application as live stacking does that for you.

cheers

Robin
Moonstruck
Posts: 112
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2021 4:34 pm

Re: Live stacking - info needed

#3

Post by Moonstruck »

Thanks very much Robin. Another question. From what I have heard, live stacking is much better for deep sky objects than the regular capture option is (i.e., you wind up with better images). Is that generally true? Or, is it more of a convenience thing? I don't mind spending the extra time processing - I am retired and this is my hobby!

Also- does live stacking work ok for planetary imaging as well? Or is it only used for deep sky?

I am still new at this as you can see. Thanks again.
Last edited by Moonstruck on Tue Oct 05, 2021 3:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
oopfan
Posts: 1321
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2017 2:37 pm
Location: New York
Contact:

Re: Live stacking - info needed

#4

Post by oopfan »

You can save money by Live Stacking. You don't need to purchase expensive software like PixInsight or Astro Pixel Processor, among others. However, there are some here who use free Deep Sky Stacker (namely, Menno.)

I would recommend using some sort of post-processing software. You can go the expensive route with Photoshop, however a great alternative is Affinity Photo (currently about $50 purchase price.) And then there is free GIMP.

I am old school: capture first, then stack, then fiddle bits. I use Astro Pixel Processor and Affinity Photo. However, if I Live Stacked, then I would cut out the cost of Astro Pixel Processor.

You asked about which is better? It is really up for you to decide. Try it all. Stick with what works for you.

As far as lunar/planetary, I don't think Live Stack works for that.

Another benefit of Live Stacking is instant gratification. There are a large number of people who do community outreach where they have to keep their audience entertained.

Brian
Moonstruck
Posts: 112
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2021 4:34 pm

Re: Live stacking - info needed

#5

Post by Moonstruck »

Thanks Brian. I already downloaded GIMP, which I have tried to use on occasion for perfecting planetary images. But the only functions I have seen people use in GIMP tutorials are color saturation and brightness. Does GIMP have other functions that are useful in deep sky or planetary photo refinement? I have looked for a good GIMP tutorial, but haven't found an all-encompassing one that compares it functions to say, adobe photoshop. When I ask people for a good tutorial on GIMP I usually just get a general comment to google it as there are many out there. Do you know of a good tutorial? And also, is Affinity photo a lot better than GIMP? Is it worth the $50 bucks, compared to the free GIMP? Photoshop is out of the question for me, as $20/month is just not worth it.

Also, if I use live stacking for deep sky images, do you think I could further refine/improve the image with the wavelet function of Registax? Then go to a GIMP or other post processing program for further refinement?

I think I am going to really like live stacking for the instant gratification aspect, but also hope the final images also turn out good. I'm hoping for a good clear night in the near future to try this out!
zerolatitude
Posts: 156
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2021 5:24 am

Re: Live stacking - info needed

#6

Post by zerolatitude »

You will almost always get a better final image by using dedicated software, but that takes time. Live stacking has the advantage of showing you the nebula / galaxy whatever almost real time. That is the fun part for many (including me).

Having said that, its not either/or. You can do both. I normally Livestack with the option to save the subs as they come in. That way, you get the excitement of seeing the DSO emerge in front of you, but you also have the individual subs saved that can be stacked / processed later in the software of your choice.

Speaking of which, another good option is Siril. Its extremely fast at pre-processing, and has some basic, but core post processing. It is also easy to automate. Siril+GIMP or Siril+Photopea (online and free) is a decent free package. Next up would be Siril + Affinity (very reasonable price alternative to photoshop, and with a good set of astrophotography macros available for free). Then of course you have the more expensive paid apps like APP or Pixinsight.
User avatar
admin
Site Admin
Posts: 13177
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2017 3:52 pm
Location: Vale of the White Horse, UK
Contact:

Re: Live stacking - info needed

#7

Post by admin »

Hi,

live stacking is only for deep sky imaging, not planetary/lunar/solar. Otherwise I think zerolatitude and oopfan have pretty much covered your other questions.

cheers,

Robin
Post Reply