Rob Lancaster replied to the topic 'Where to set focus offset for different filters?' in the forum. 4 days ago

Yes jiberjaber, your offsets should work just fine, or you can also use the "absolute" values you said as well. Since the focus offsets are relative to one another and focus changes are differences between the offsets, then it wouldn't matter to have all the offsets shifted by the same value.

As for which filter you use for focusing, that should not matter as long as the offsets are all entered correctly for each filter and as long as your focuser moves correctly based on the offset when switching filters. I say this because some focusers don't reliably have the same numbers for the same focus positions when focusing in or out and sometimes the focus drifts a little. So really the focus offsets can only be used as long as your focuser can reliably move by the same amount each time.

Read More...

Rob Lancaster replied to the topic 'Where to set focus offset for different filters?' in the forum. 6 days ago

I don't believe you understand what I am saying. The filter offsets are just simply relating how the focus distance of each filter compares to the other, NOT how far to move it when going from one filter to the next in any particular sequence. So your filter offsets could be 0 L, +20 R, +15 G and +25 B, or they could be -20 L, 0 R, -5 G, +5 B and it would have exactly the same effect. Also it doesn't matter what numbers you use, as long as the relative distance between the offsets remains the same. For your example, +1000 L, +1020 R, +1015 G, and +1025 B would work exactly the same as well. Ekos will calculate how far to move it between each filter based upon difference between the offsets. So it doesn't matter how you order them in your imaging sequence or even if you switch filters in a different operation. The offsets are global. If you set the filter offsets relative to each other, then any operation Ekos does, when it changes the filter for any reason, it takes the filter offsets into account and adjusts the focus by the difference between the two offsets of the filters it switches between.

Read More...

Rob Lancaster replied to the topic 'Where to set focus offset for different filters?' in the forum. 7 days ago

The offsets are relative to each other, so if you have a bunch of filters that are parfocal, call those 0 and do the other offsets relative to that, that would be easiest. If they are all different, then it’s up to you which one you call zero.

Read More...

Alex Varakin is friends with Rob Lancaster

Hi, I think I have it going to both places actually. If you check, it should also be in the libdir. I had to put it in both places because I have had issues in the past on some systems not being able to find libraries in the libdir or libdir not properly being set. For example, I have been on some raspberry pi systems and all the INDI libraries got installed in the libdir, but then when another program tried to find them, it looked in /usr/lib and couldn't find them since they were in the libdir. So I think it might be good to install in both places just in case.

install(TARGETS stellarsolverstatic DESTINATION "${CMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX}/lib/")
install(TARGETS stellarsolver DESTINATION "${CMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX}/lib/")
install(TARGETS stellarsolverstatic DESTINATION ${CMAKE_INSTALL_LIBDIR})
install(TARGETS stellarsolver DESTINATION ${CMAKE_INSTALL_LIBDIR})

Read More...

Yes, it sounds like that would work pretty well. I am hoping that when I am done it won't be so many steps.

Read More...

So, to give an update: Now that the repo is mostly perfected and almost ready for integration into programs except for a couple of remaining issues, a friend of mine is helping me to do a code review. I am also working on how other programs will interface with it. He and I are playing with integrating it into KStars now. I also figured that before we get too far, I would attempt a renaming. The name sexysolver came naturally from blending the words Sextractor and Solver which is very descriptive of what the library does. However, several people expressed concern about the name, and not just for puritanical reasons. Recently another friend told me that some people's workplaces might filter or block anything that has the word sexy or sex in it, which could mean that they would be unable to work with the library due to the name. So I have thought about it for a couple of weeks and decided that the name StellarSolver is close enough and still pretty catchy.

I am not 100% sure that I have sorted out all the issues with renaming it yet, since it took me a few steps, but it seems to be mostly good now.

As for how you update, are you currently using Linux, Mac, or Windows? If it is Linux, you can first "git pull" and then use one of the two install scripts that I put in the linux-scripts folder. I did verify that this worked properly yesterday. If it is Mac or Windows, even though I code on my Mac, for distribution I have been releasing craft recipes and binary distributions of the tester. Before I do that, I need to do more testing today to make sure everything works and that I updated the craft recipes properly.

An interesting thing that I noticed: Even though I changed the name of the repo from sexysolver-tester to stellarsolver, the old links still work fine and if you already cloned the repo, you can just do a "git pull" since it is actually still the same repository.

Read More...

Rob Lancaster replied to the topic 'AstroPi3 Scripts revised' in the forum. 1 month ago

I can take a look at it. Right now I'm a bit bogged down with other projects. But it is getting into the summer now and I should have more time since my students are almost done.

Read More...