The Definitive Guide to WBPP: CMOS OSC Configuration (with Flat Darks)

This is the Definitive Guide to WBPP in Pixinsight.
The video shows the typical configuration for a CMOS OSC (one-shot color sensor) with the use of matching dark frames for the flat field images.
Please, you must first watch the Calibration sections before watching this video. See:
• Calibration of Astrono...
and
• WBPP (PixInsight): Fla...
Please watch the videos in the order they listed in the playlist:
• The Definitive Guide t...
More at:
AdamBlockStudio...
See the Reviews:
www.adamblocks...
Those just starting out in PixInsight will enjoy FastTrack Training!
www.adamblocks...
(see the video • Introducing FastTrack ... )
#PixInsight #WBPP #LocalNormalization #CMOS #FlatDarks #Biases #Calibration #Darks #Script #processing #Astrophotography

[@JoeBob79569]

This is great. I had been humming and hawing about purchasing PixInsight for the last few months. I was just using Siril, which is fine and all but I felt I was starting to outgrow it a little bit. But I was a bit confused with PI when I went to WBPP trying to calibrate the dark frames for my flats. I thought I was going to have to create a master dark for my flats, and then go around again and apply it to the flats. I had no idea that it was this easy, just add all the darks together and let PI sort them out! And that little calibration diagram is great, a nice little bit of icing on the cake..

[@AdamBlock]

Thanks! The diagram was something I advocated strongly for when working with Roberto at the time.

[@teninnykanal]

Finally! This is the best explanation of this topic. Thank you kindly!

[@AdamBlock]

Thank you for watching!

[@AdamBlock]

(There are more "Finally... best explanations of topic x.... on my website at AdamBlockStudios.com :) )

[@steveweintraub1113]

Another great tutorial Adam. TY for the detailed walkthrough. Since I’m subscriber to AB Studios, I’ll log in to get the additional explanations, as you mentioned.

[@mickeyhuffman635]

Thank you and it wasn't your video that was the problem, the video was perfect. It was my first time trying WBPP so I was all thumbs and totally misunderstood the warning. Which is why I wrote you in hopes you would answer. again Thank you

[@Chorge1972]

Thank you so much!!!!!! Just wish, my computer was as fast as yours! Integration in below 5min 😮… I fight with 25min on my i7 with 64GB Ram

[@MrGeert1972]

Your video is very well, and I learned a lot, I did CC but when running my WBPP it says failed. And I put in 121 lights but is rejected 70 0 star pair matches found. If I look at my individual subs they all have stars in them. They where al taking at the same night.

[@albertosalinas717]

Me too…

[@richardsauerbrun2412]

Hello Adam ... I have enjoyed several of your videos and appreciate your expert help. My last attempt with your OSC (with Flat Darks) workflow has been very problematic. I am unable to generate any masters. I will attempt to attach my log file as well as a screen shot of WBPP screen. Would you be willing to provide some assistance to your Arizona colleague in Scottsdale?

[@AdamBlock]

You can post the screen shots to the forum on my site.

[@christianvulpescu1398]

In SGP you can choose before you start the session between lights, flats, darks or bias. The gentleman chose "flat" instead of "dark" for the flatdarks.

[@AdamBlock]

Yeah... but I think the reason is because of the name. He called them "darkflats" which I argue causes this kind of error.

[@Chorge1972]

Dear Adam! One question please: does it make any difference if I put those Darkflats/Flatdarks into the Bias Folder instead of the folder?! I‘d say no, but……. Ah - and: CC failed in my Dataset… any idea why??? 😢

[@AdamBlock]

Technically it does not matter if you put them in the bias panel since it is subracted. But there are two uses for a bias... one is to subtract from light frames or flats. You will still get a warning in terms of lights. The other is for scaling dark frames... but this presumably isn't what you have in hand since it is not really a 0 second exposure. My suggestion... dude, do not confuse yourself. If you do not know the answer to the question.. you shouldn't do it. lol In terms of CC... no, you need to provide screen shots. Did you click 'apply to all frames" for example? Several kinds of errors you can make.

[@daviswh1]

I assume the Star Alignment function that you taught us in the Fast Track training course, is now OBE? Again based on the Fast Track training, the next step, after all the WBFF integrated functions has been successful competed, is Photometric Calibration, DBE and then SCNR? Correct. Thanks for the great series of WBPP lessons.

[@AdamBlock]

"Order of British Empire?" Sorry, you lost me as to what OBE means. FastTrack Training now says DBE then PCC and other stuff... yes.

[@daviswh1]

@@AdamBlock sorry for using the acronym, bad habit: OBE, overcome by events. What I was asking does the new WBPP incorporate the Star Alignment function, that was (is?) a separate function that was described in the Fast Track training that I completed? Thanks for the patience.

[@AdamBlock]

@@daviswh1 Yes. WBPP will do everything (Star Alignment, Normalization, Weighting and Image Integration). In Fast Track I suggest learning the Calibration method only FIRST- so that new users will understand Star Alignment and Image Integration independently. But once a user is comfortable with these processes- WBPP can be configured to do everything. You need to understand WHAT WBPP is doing so that when there is a problem, it takes seconds to fix instead of hours of going on line and asking questions as OBE folks are want to do. Of course I show all of this in Fundamentals.

[@AntoninoNicoletti]

Thank you so much for sharing this bunch of information with the rest of us. I have a way to proceed for which I'd like to have your feedback. Is it completely wrong, acceptable or OK? I do acquire for each session Flats and Darkflats for each filters used in that particular session. Then, to save space on my hard drive, I process them as follows. I use the WBPP script where I drop the Flatdarks in the BIAS section and the Flats in the FLATS section. I launch the script and I get master files for each filter (BIAS and FLATS). I can then trash the raw Flats and Darkflats files. I just keep the master files that I use to process my LIGHTS later on. In addition, I have a collection of master Darks for each exposition time and temperature that I use with my camera. So in the final WBPP process, I drop the LIGHTS in the LIGHTS, the master BIASES in the BIAS, the master FLATS in the FLATS, the master DARKS in the DARKS. I do tick the option 'Optimize Darks'. Thank you in advance for your feedback! Best

[@AdamBlock]

You can certainly use master frames to do the pre-processing (calibration) in WBPP. However, once you make the master- if there is something wrong with it (and you discover this later and you want to reprocess) after you delete the raw calibration files you cannot go back. In addition, it is often difficult to trouble shoot calibration problems if you do not have the original files. So...something to consider. (On other note, due to the logic that is used in WBPP- it is best to put the darks that calibrate the flat field images into the darks section if you have a camera that requires matched darks due to its electronic signature. Finally, Optimizing darks is OK for LIGHTS ...not good for Flats of course. However, Optimization does have some negatives. You can watch my video on that in this series.

[@AntoninoNicoletti]

@@AdamBlock Thank you for your quick reply!! I got your point but provided that I capture 50 flats and 50 darkflats per filter and per session, and that my camera produced 52mb files, it is not reasonable for me to keep all of them. So , according to you, it is ok to use darkflats as biases in the WBPP script? Thank you again!

[@AdamBlock]

@@AntoninoNicoletti I do not recommend using dark frame for biases- there is logic specific to biases. You are actually doing it correctly the way you are approaching it...but it is possible to get your self into trouble. A dark for flats assumes there is something more (some electronic signature) other than the bias level. If you have a "nice" camera and you are taking the shortest exposures for your flats... they ARE biases (and you should just call them that). I think there might be some confusion in the language we are using.

[@AntoninoNicoletti]

@@AdamBlock I might be wrong but in my understanding, for CMOS amp-glow free cameras, dark flats (darks for flats) can be considered as bias frames for short exposures (which is the case for flats that are usually less than 4sec and very often less than 1sec). The WBPP script is not very explicit in the way of exploiting Darks for Flats. I found this way (dropping them in the bias section) but I'm still not sure this is the right way to process these files...Best regards

[@mickeyhuffman635]

I just started to use wbpp with my OSC, do not use darks, lights or biases. I usually take 1000 to 2000, 1 to 2 sec images and I use Pixinsight debayer, sub frame sel, Star align and integration, I can load 1000 at one time, I tried doing that with WBPP & it keeps telling me I can only load 256 frames, why? And when I did load 200 frames it took forever and then left 4 master lights and 1 reference (i understand the reference image) I followed your OSC video.

[@AdamBlock]

You followed my video? Mikey... please read that "error" (it is just a warning) again. The warning concerns long file NAMES... not the number of files you can potentially load. See this video: kzbin.info/www/bejne/gF7dfXSEe6dljbc I believe you might be confused on this matter.

[@rudolfbumm8126]

WBPP 2.5.9 no longer produces a single master light as output and splits to R G B after debayering in all folders. Can one prevent this? Not nice for OSC Comet processing ....

[@AdamBlock]

Just check the Recombine RGB to get what you want in the post processing panel.

[@jfakatselis]

Great video. One question I have is that whenever I look at linked OSC images they are always always heavily green until I unlink the channels. I noticed when you looked at a subframe there was no green cast. Wow. Am I doing something incorrectly perhaps? I’m using a QHY268C OSC.

[@AdamBlock]

That is completely normal. It depends on the sensor, the pattern, the sky brightness, the sky color... etc. As long as the unlinked STF looks reasonable everything is fine.

[@jfakatselis]

@@AdamBlock I, personally have never seen a linked image that was not all green. It was unusual to me, but I understand that it may be due to camera and sky conditions. My skies at home may be different and are just under Bortle 7 so that's probably why I never see no color cast in my images. Those images used in your video were possibly from a better sky I would safely assume.