Loading…
12
Just realized stacking my astronomy photos in DeepSkyStacker works way better than Sequator for faint nebulae
I've been shooting the same Andromeda target for about 3 months now, trying different stacking software to see what gives the cleanest results. Sequator was my go-to because it's fast and handles star trails, but I kept getting weird background noise on dimmer regions. Switched to DeepSkyStacker on a whim last week for the same 40 frames I already had, and the difference was night and day. Much better signal-to-noise on the faint outer arms. Anyone else find one staker works way better for certain targets? What's your go-to and why?
3 comments
Log in to join the discussion
Log In3 Comments
averym825mo ago
Man I was the exact opposite for the longest time - I swore by Sequator because it's so much simpler to use (and man does it process fast, especially when you're just trying to get a quick preview of your data). But you're totally right about the background noise on faint stuff, I noticed it most when I was trying to pull out the IFN around M81/M82 last winter. DeepSkyStacker just handles those low signal areas way better, even if it takes forever and crashes on me sometimes (especially with 100+ subs, ugh). Your Andromeda comparison actually convinced me to go back and reprocess some of my old data to see what I was missing.
7
smith.matthew5mo ago
So with M81/M82, did you see that noise in Sequator ruining the dust lane details too, or was it just the faint background stuff?
0