BlurXTerminator: To Cheat or Not to Cheat?

[@Barbaria_Sailing]

It is cheating IF it uses ANY form of other images (not taken by you) as a reference to do the job.

[@jrgenmlmann4998]

Living on the coast under non-stop jet streams, it is a game changer. Saving up for when my BlurXTerminator trial period is over😊

[@astrojourneyuk]

The challenges of an astrophotographer, clouds, satellites, planes etc. 😢

[@Mr77pro]

I use it and it works well. Nice on the stars too. But I think once the honeymoon is over people will realize, as I already have, that noiseXterminator is the most valuable tool of the X series.

[@astrojourneyuk]

I find that for StarXterminator. It’s certainly something I couldn’t do before without owning a Windows machine as StarNet didn’t work on a new Mac. :(

[@dumpydalekobservatory]

It's a great tool there's no doubt about that but then Russell Croman has made some good tools for processing over the years, I still use Gradient Xterminator within Photoshop to this day. I don't use Pixinsight simply because I don't have decent enough hardware to run it as lets face it this hobby is expensive enough as it is, it even struggles running Siril so until I can afford to update the pc I'm kinda stuck & probably will be for quite some time.

[@astrojourneyuk]

Thanks for dropping by. It's interesting that you can run Photoshop but not PixInsight. I guess in Photoshop the changes that are being made are simpler steps where as PixInsight will be a bit more Big Bang maybe? Interestingly, I stopped using Photoshop and the plugin didn't work for some reason on my setup and that's when I moved to PixInsight. This hobby certainly is expensive!

[@CDigata]

dont confuse yourself, only thing its cheating is TIME ;)

[@astrojourneyuk]

A good way of looking at it. :)

[@Astrobloke]

Nice video Marc. I thought about the cheating aspect and I don't think it is at all. I basically used to use Deconvolution and sharpening within Pixinsight and all this is doing is making that process a lot quicker and less complicated. Now that sounds like I am being unfair as Russell has done a fantastic job on this tool. I think its great and people like Russell are helping others that find processing difficult get great results which can only be a good thing for the hobby. CS

[@astrojourneyuk]

I completely agree with you, it seems to really be using AI to workout what to put into the deconvolution tool and definitely seems honest, when compared to what Topaz Sharpening AI does.

[@OlliesSpace]

I've certainly been impressed by the first impression of this tool, I do think it's going to be called PixXTerminator soon :)

[@astrojourneyuk]

😂😂😂 it’s certainly could be. 3 of his tools are probably the same cost as the whole of PixInsight

[@baz_astra]

I feel like BXT went from awesome to overused in about five days straight. I've already found it far too easy to spot in the wild. There's something about the look that's very obvious. My astro-feed is full of images that just scream it was obviously used. Some kind of synthetic oversharpened look to it.

[@astrojourneyuk]

I've not seen that much in the wild yet. Unless the images are zoomed in I wouldn't spot it apart from smaller stars. That said it might just be my eye sight being not great these days. :D

[@SimonsAstro]

Nice review Marc, I bought this a couple of days ago! I don’t think it’s cheating, basically, any tool that helps my images look better, I’m up for that👍 Clear skies!

[@astrojourneyuk]

My initial argument before doing any research was that a lot of what we do isn't scientifically accurate as such and so it's more art than science so where is the harm. However, it turns out that this is quite true to the original data and so more accurate IMO. In the same way that deconvolution is manipulating the data to de-blur, this just makes it easier.

[@SimonsAstro]

@@astrojourneyuk Agreed 👍

[@robertgrenader858]

Somebody should do a BlurX video with one line: "It F-ing works, pay the money and shut up."

[@astrojourneyuk]

😂 it would be a great KZbin Short!

[@woody5109]

Great review - no more cheating then any other program I guess but it’s easy to over extend our expectations and basically fake the final image.

[@astrojourneyuk]

To an extent it feels like the equivalent of using Photoshop to do everything, where as PixInsight is a nice and specific tool for the job which makes things easier. I see Blur Xterminator as a tool to speed up deconvolution which is a tool that already exists. :)

[@krzysztofchmielewski9246]

Is there a floor tom behind you? :D

[@astrojourneyuk]

Yes, that’s my sons drum kit that we’re trying to sell now. :(

[@nbw555]

Nice report on the tool, shame it's only really usable with pix, I use startools and that has a star reduction and decon module. From what I have already viewed I don't think blur ext is worth the money.

[@astrojourneyuk]

I do wonder why it’s PixInsight only, either there was a deal made or he didn’t want to support multiple platforms? Who knows? I’m close in agreement, I love the speed of blurxterminator but I’m on the fence as to whether to pay $99 for a quick star reduction. The nebula detail is only visible when zooming in and most of my images just go on instagram.

[@SteveZodiac777]

I don't think it's cheating - any more than NASA parking their telescopes in earth orbit! Besides, I need all the help I can get!😅

[@astrojourneyuk]

A great way of looking at it. 😂

[@anata5127]

Cheat. But allowed more inexpensive equipment into astrophotography. So, it is a cheat with good intension.

[@astrojourneyuk]

Why do you say it’s cheating? I think it’s good to discuss and share with others.

[@anata5127]

@@astrojourneyuk It took real efforts to get great pictures. Not anymore. However, I still see major differences in mastery and expensive equipment, when it comes to reflection nebulae and galaxies. For these objects tough to achieve proper SNR and resolution: essences of astrophotography. Modern technologies and processing still doesn’t help.

[@astrojourneyuk]

Comparing to the craziness of film based astrophotography and manual guiding things are definitely easier. Also from a processing point of view just thinking of Photoshop compared to PixInsight or APP really helps.

[@anata5127]

@@astrojourneyuk I don’t compare to those. I am comparing to CCD cameras. Now, FLI used cameras cost nothing, they have been 8-12K once upon time. Now, people using tiny scopes taking low resolution pictures, screwing couple of buttons in Pixinsight and picture is ready. Doesn’t work with targets that I mentioned.

[@mr.d.8121]

No. Not cheating.

[@astrojourneyuk]

I’m inclined to agree to be honest.

[@Lacquerhead-TX]

Yeah, it's totally cheating. So I bought it. :)

[@astrojourneyuk]

😂😂😂