What version of siril do you use. That should not be so long.
Last version of siril reads CR3 files.
I am using Siril 0.9.12
Even if Siril does read CR3 files for the Canon R5 , I like the features that Raw Therapee has
OK. So use the 0.99.6 version
Which RT features do you refer to?
OK but doing this in one pass would be faster.
Main feature that RT has is Lens Profiles. The vignetting profile obviates the need for flat frames.
The lens distortion correction makes it easier to stack frames from a wide angle lens that are not perfectly aligned.
One pass would be faster in an idealized case, but in this case the Siril conversion from TIFF to FITS is slower than the sum of RT and Adobe DNG converter, by a huge factor (I would estimate about 20X slower).
Not using the last version.
I never use TIFF, maybe siril’s TIFF reader is very slow? That’s a bit strange. If you demosaic with siril, it’s faster in the recent versions, some other things are faster or parallelised too.
Conversion was not multi-threaded in 0.9.12.
0.99.6 is MUCH faster, thanks. It gave me a message saying this
3:21:14: Conversion: processing 36 files…
13:21:14: You should enable the Developer Mode in order to create symbolic links instead of simply copying files.
I don’t know how to enable Developer Mode, and I am not sure quite what this means.
Only needed for FITS to FITS conversion. Fixed in dev version.
While I am at it, here is why I want lens distortion correction.
I will sometimes shoot a bunch of sub-exposures with a stationary camera. If these are stacked normally, with registration on the stars, it means that over time the frame drifts. Instead of being stacking with approximately the same framing, it is stacking where the edge of one frame may be overlapped with the center of the first frame.
I did this, for example, for the Orionids earlier this week, which is where the images I am working come from.
The problem is that in a wide angle lens there is enough distortion between the center and edge of a the frame that they are not going to stack well. Indeed I found that you can’t even plate solve the result from even an excellent wide angle lens (Sigma 40mm f/1,4 ART lens on full frame). That is barely “wide angle” but it is enough that programs like ASTAP won’t plate solve.
In a full panorama stitching program like Hugin or PTGui, the program solves for lens distortion at the same time as doing registration. But those programs don’t do the outlier removal and normalization that Siril does.
APP does the full distortion calculation, but rather strangely it uses an N^2 complexity algorithm - where N is the number of files the stack or mosaic: it checks every pairwise overlap of the frames. That is of course unnecessary because you can plate solve to get the rough overlap.
So, by doing lens distortion correction in the RAW conversion stage, it becomes possible to use Siril to do stacking of partially overlapping frames.
OK, but converting to debayered TIFF files makes not possible the preprocessing step.
I don’t understand.
Normally, Siril does what most other astro software does - it uses Master dark, light, bias and other files to make a calibrated file.
Raw conversion software such as Raw Therapee does much of that work. The lens vignette profile, for example is essentially what the Master flat is for. So a lot of people who shoot astro with a DSLR (or now mirrorless like R5) find that it is not necessary to do the standard processing.
10:28:21: Reading TIFF: 16-bit file 3T8A0486.tif, 3 layer(s), 8216x5482 pixels
10:30:38: Saving FITS: file mw40_00483.fit, 3 layer(s), 8216x5482 pixels
10:30:39: Reading TIFF: 16-bit file 3T8A0487.tif, 3 layer(s), 8216x5482 pixels
10:32:57: Saving FITS: file mw40_00484.fit, 3 layer(s), 8216x5482 pixels
Those timings suggest that reading each TIFF is taking the time (over two minutes) and writing the FITS is fast (1 second).
If it helps, ImageMagick can convert from TIFF to FITS. For example:
magick x.tiff x.fits
For a 8216x5482 pixel TIFF, this takes 7 seconds on my laptop.
1 Like
Of course siril can. But we never subtract darks and/or biases from interpolated data. This is non sens.
of course… the point is that for DSLR images, a good raw converter like Raw Therapee is an alternative to conventional astro processing.
Some people would say it is not quite as good, but is more convenient. However, with the inclusion of lens profiles it is arguably much more capable than conventional processing.
Yes but does the lens profile could be applied to the cfa image?
If not it is not good for astrophotography.
I don’t know where in the processing the lens profile is applied, but I don’t see how that matters to astrophotography.
It is possible that it is done before debayering the CFA. It is possible it is done after. The Raw Therapee people would know.
Vignetting correction could happen either time. So could distortion correction.
In general one wants pixel operations to occur on linear data. Lens profile corrections ARE done to linear data - so I don’t see why this would be problematic.
Vignetting yes, but distortion and aberration correctionare much more difficult to do before demosaicking (ideally CA and demosaic tied together).