KStars v3.5.0 Release Date?

[Hy Murveit]

*Eric:* I see. So, can you check to see you don't have a file saved that's
messing things up (e.g. delete your
~/.local/share/kstars/SavedFocusProfiles.ini file if it exists, and then
make sure you're using the "1-Focus Default" profile). You could play with
the initialKeep and keepNum values in the
kstars/ekos/auxiliary/stellarsolverprofile.cpp file in the Focus method.
(Also see the note to Rob below).

*Rob:* could there be a bug that if you have a saved .ini file, then the
initialKeep parameter no longer gets set and uses a very high default? I
wouldn't be surprised if that's what messing Eric up.

Hy

On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 12:24 AM Hy Murveit <murveit at gmail.com> wrote:

> Also, for the record, I do agree that Rob should either expose the
> initialKeep parameter or make it a multiple of the Keep parameter.
> As it currently stands, it effectively limits the maximum value of the
> keep parameter.
> H
>
> On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 12:19 AM Hy Murveit <murveit at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Jasem: I can go either way I suppose, but in my experience, it's running
>> reasonably quickly. I won't object too strongly if you want to fix it.
>>
>> Eric:  When I processed your images on my RPi4, they processed reasonably
>> quickly:
>>
>> *Looking at the 1x1 image:*
>> *Computing the HFR took 1-2s, but that's using my "quick HFR" which only
>> looks at stars in the middle 25% of the image.*
>> *Turning off the quick HFR option slowed it down to 4-5 seconds (again
>> possibly alongside guiding).*
>> *Are you using something slower than a RPi4? Could there be something
>> else slowing down the computations?*
>>
>> *Looking at the 2x2 image:*
>> *Seemed to take 1-2s without quickhfr, and 1s or less with quickhfr.*
>> *FWIW, I run my focus with 2x2 binning of a ZWO ASI 1600.*
>>
>>
>> We should figure out what the issue is.
>> Hy
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 11, 2020 at 11:50 PM Eric Dejouhanet <
>> eric.dejouhanet at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Which is my case right now. But in the particular subject of 3.5, I
>>> agree. I would like to know if the profiles are editable by the end-user
>>> when they are saved locally, I mean, are all parameters from the file
>>> loaded back properly?
>>>
>>> You know what I also mean here. Are there any tests validating that
>>> part?
>>>
>>> eric.dejouhanet at gmail.com - https://astronomy.dejouha.net
>>> *De:* mutlaqja at ikarustech.com
>>> *Envoyé:* 12 novembre 2020 08:46
>>> *À:* hy at murveit.com
>>> *Cc:* rlancaste at gmail.com; eric.dejouhanet at gmail.com;
>>> sterne-jaeger at openfuture.de; kstars-devel at kde.org
>>> *Objet:* Re: KStars v3.5.0 Release Date?
>>>
>>> That's fine with me. As long as it does end up generating too many stars
>>> that ends up clogging HFR calculations unnecessarily.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Best Regards,
>>> Jasem Mutlaq
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 10:35 AM Hy Murveit <murveit at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Jasem,
>>>>
>>>> This close to the release, I'm inclined to be conservative here and let
>>>> it be.
>>>> It's just something I came up with, not some reference algorithm, and
>>>> it seems to be working as it was implemented.
>>>> I suggest that we can play with this in 3.5.1 if you want, but not mess
>>>> with this now.
>>>>
>>>> Hy
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Nov 11, 2020 at 11:11 PM Jasem Mutlaq <mutlaqja at ikarustech.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hello Robert,
>>>>>
>>>>> Good catch on the partition & keep stars. I think we ought to resolve
>>>>> this not by simply dividing by the number of chunks as this might skew the
>>>>> results. In some images, some regions are more star-rich than others. Maybe
>>>>> we should do a POST star detection but PRE star filter step where the # of
>>>>> stars are then trimmed to the required initial keep?
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>> Jasem Mutlaq
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 9:41 AM Robert Lancaster <rlancaste at gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Oh the more significant question that I asked though, I don’t think
>>>>>> we addressed it yet.  Right now initial keep doesn’t work the way you meant
>>>>>> it to due to the partitions.  Does that need to be changed?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>
>>>>>> > On Nov 12, 2020, at 1:37 AM, Robert Lancaster <rlancaste at gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Yep they are the same kind of thing when it comes to stars
>>>>>> certainly.  Your argument that HFR should correlate to magnitude is
>>>>>> probably very true for stars, but not for nebulae or galaxies.  They can be
>>>>>> large but dim.  It also might not be true for some stars with dust around
>>>>>> them
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >> On Nov 12, 2020, at 1:24 AM, Hy Murveit <murveit at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kstars-devel/attachments/20201112/96085e82/attachment.htm>