Jump to content

StarXTerminator v Starnet


Recommended Posts

Today I downloaded a trial of StarXterminator to see for myself how it stacked up against Starnet. The same image was used for both tests, just stretched using STF and HistogramTransformation, no other processing was done. The xisf was used in the Starnet version, which was then converted to tiff for StarXterminator in Photoshop.

 

There are 3 sets of images. The full size starless version of each image, then a close up of both the stars and resulting starless images performed by both applications. The results are conclusive on this particular image, which was probably one of the more difficult to remove the stars, because of the dense star field. StarXterminator performed the better of the two on this particular image, and I suspect it would perform better on most images. I see no discernible artifacts on the Xterminator images, except for a little smudge where the two bright stars where located. The Starnet version unfortunately leaves behind artifacts on both the starless and stars images.

 

Starnet is still a great tool, but I think StarXterminator has now overtaken it.

 

Update! Since downloading StarXterminator, they have released a version for Pixinsight, which also works on linear images. I'm interested to see how it works on linear images, this opens a lot of possibilities in processing.

 

Starnet Starless Full Size

 

Starnet_Starless_Fullsize.thumb.jpg.16809f6e6ca0f134e9cea348f247026f.jpg

 

StarXterminator Starless Full Size

 

Xterminator_Starless_Fullsize.thumb.jpg.96d83920cdba5c2050cfe34527fee0ed.jpg

 

Starnet Starless CloseUp

 

Starnet_Starless.thumb.jpg.3877438cb4bc9c9920989b883081b9da.jpg

 

StarXterminator Starless CloseUp

 

Xterminator_Starless.thumb.jpg.90633d768595ff68b6e7559210c334d1.jpg

 

Starnet Stars CloseUp

 

Starnet_Stars.thumb.jpg.92fc87787fe81cb84dc9ab8740f87adc.jpg

 

StarXterminator Stars CloseUp

 

Xterminator_Stars.thumb.jpg.20cc708bf097500e7c3b75b68c4c9046.jpg

 

 

Edited by AstronomyUkraine
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great that it has also been released for PI too. I would give it a go in PI. Although converting to TIFF for PS and then reloading the resultant starless image in PI is not really an issue. You can still apply the xisf header from the original image to the starlessTIFF once reloaded in PI so you don’t lose anything.

Brian does StarXterminator also produce a separate image containing the stars like the starmask in StarNet?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, TerryMcK said:

Great that it has also been released for PI too. I would give it a go in PI. Although converting to TIFF for PS and then reloading the resultant starless image in PI is not really an issue. You can still apply the xisf header from the original image to the starlessTIFF once reloaded in PI so you don’t lose anything.

Brian does StarXterminator also produce a separate image containing the stars like the starmask in StarNet?

What I found so far Terry. The module does produce a separate star mask, but the results are not great in Linear. The starless image is great, but the star mask is a disaster. Stretching the image then generating the star mask results in perfect stars.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, TerryMcK said:

I’ll download a trial for the PI version in that case. Hopefully if after purchasing a license it gives free upgrades as bugs are found.

It does warn you to keep the file in a safe place, as PI will remove the process during an upgrade. I didn't find any info about updates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sold on the PI version of StarXterminator. Not only is it much quicker than StarNet it also did not produce a nasty halo around where one of the stars was in my California Nebula.

Both of these images started off the same with just some basic stretching and ABE applied.

First the Starnet version:

image.thumb.png.845fe740c866f56cedd369d0637cb0e1.png

 

Note that big halo around the star

 

The same image run through StarXTerminator:

 

image.thumb.png.5300f9dd5133b3a509b684b34704c7cf.png

 

Completely devoid of artefacts.

 

I'll run it for the trial period to evaluate it fully then will probably make a purchase. I didn't look at the Photoshop version but some people on other forums have said it is better than the PI version but didn't say what was better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, TerryMcK said:

Sold on the PI version of StarXterminator. Not only is it much quicker than StarNet it also did not produce a nasty halo around where one of the stars was in my California Nebula.

Both of these images started off the same with just some basic stretching and ABE applied.

First the Starnet version:

image.thumb.png.845fe740c866f56cedd369d0637cb0e1.png

 

Note that big halo around the star

 

The same image run through StarXTerminator:

 

image.thumb.png.5300f9dd5133b3a509b684b34704c7cf.png

 

Completely devoid of artefacts.

 

I'll run it for the trial period to evaluate it fully then will probably make a purchase. I didn't look at the Photoshop version but some people on other forums have said it is better than the PI version but didn't say what was better.

 

The PI version only come out on the 8th, so is probably not advanced as the PS version yet. I can't say I notice any differences in quality using either software. Maybe it's a speed thing. Nope, the same image was used in PS and PI, both took exactly the same amount of time.

Edited by AstronomyUkraine
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just come across a potential bug in StarXterminator in Pixinsight. When lightly stretching an image before using StarXterminator, I get an error message coming up as soon as I apply the process.

 

"The target view appears to be linear (unstretched). StarXTerminator may give poor results without the 'Linear' option selected."

 

I ignored the message, and the process worked fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...