Last night I found myself completely unable to use the Align module because StellarSolver failed in "Capture and Solve"
Every.
Single.
Time.
Very odd because I can save an image at the same position with the same settings and "Load and Slew" nails the solution very quickly.
I've attached a screenshot to illustrate the problem. Image preview shows (faintly) a nicely centered M33. Scale and position are correct. Same image in "Load and Slew" solves almost instantly.
Can somebody help me figure out what I'm doing wrong?
I did a quick demo of the problem and saved logs. Basically this short session demos the alignment failure with "Capture and Solve" followed by a quick capture with successful "Load and Slew"
I think your FOV is wrong. With the ASI1600MM and a focal length of 488mm the FOV should be ~ twice that size. That much of divergence is outside the tolerance of the Stellar Solver.
Is this not working in more than one setup? It sounds like you've got a RPi4 and a computer with otherwise identical setups?
My recollection of how Load & Slew works is that it solves the loaded image, slews the mount to the putative centre of the loaded image, then takes a further image, solves it, reslews and so on.
So in this, is it taking and successfully solving those subsequent images?
Reading through your log, it doesn't look like it is.
One other thing I noticed was a difference in downsampling between the loaded image and the captured ones. The loaded image is being evaluated at "Scale range: 3.85544 to 5.78316 arcsec/pixel".
The first autocapture by contrast: "[...] arcsec per pixel range: 1.94069 to 3.8505"
The second (I think) autocapture: "[...] arcsec per pixel range: 1.45551 to 2.88787"
So from my understanding, as this range decreases, you need an increasingly large library of astrometry FITS files.
And that brings me to one last thing in your logs: "Total Size of Index files: 2.44583 GB"
I've got like 18 GB worth. So perhaps you don't have enough of the higher precision FITS files installed?
I just saw El Corazon's response after posting mine... I agree, your FOV appears to be out. And that probably ties in to my discovery of the discrepancy in image scale in your log.