Bencooper

I have suddenly noticed same on my Windows 10 version which didn't bother me before- can readability be improved on this machine (tools, studio etc)

Dave, IMHO once you have a star tracker, you can keep the exposure open as long as you like and there is no other reason to shoot at f/2.8 ? In fact, you will get better depth of field if you stop down some, using hyperfocal length to capture stars (infinity) and more foreground as well in the case of panoramic stitching (without star tracker, which would blur any fixed foreground). I'm not selling it, but Photopills App is a really great set of tools, and it has a useful H-F distance calculator !

thank you Old Bruce - I usually carry an old plastic shopping bag which I fill with kilos of local pebbles to hang from the tripod during shooting which seems to do the job. Also a home-made canvas windbreak on poles driven-in to protect the tripod (but not the camera !)

Of course, Dave, what we didn't mention (I think) in "star stacking" was that the natural imperative in night photography to open apertures wide (1.4/2.8 etc) to capture the light, leads to chromatic aberration and distortion in the corners leading to star trails and coma, irrespective of the quality of glass (this might not be significant or noticeable in normal daytime landscapes). Similarly, cranking up ISO above 3200 might lead to increased noise but, as importantly, loss of dynamic range and colour ! In this regard, Star Tracking devices become more desirable !

Dizzwave, I haven't yet tried Dan's suggestions as I was hoping to find a batch process in Affinity to do the work (20 images). I did find that Sequator (in that respect, and so quick!) sorted the problem intelligently but were all those stars REALLY stars or flysh_t (noise)! It also removed some aircraft trails automatically !(see attached, sky pollution at bottom) However, I did try selecting best images visually and found one to have camera shake (dual stars - dodgy tripod?). Barrel distortion effectively warps space and with stacking speeds the affected stars, causing trailing. I think distortion correction is only approximate and even with the best optics the solution really is to use larger focal length (16 or 18mm), lose some field, and shorter exposure to reduce tracking. I will try the workaround and report back (I am a newbie at Affinity but recognise practice makes perfect) but I believe Affinity should address these fundamentals ie incorporate distortion correction within New Astro Stacking and providing a batch process somewhere. Sequator2Affinity rendered.tiff

Thank you for your advice - i will try these options and report back ! 😀

When one takes several (20?) identical frames of part of The Milky Way (for improving signal to noise ratio in" stacking"), one is actually capturing moving stars (not to be confused with stitching several adjacent and overlapping frames in a panorama) Alignment in New Astrophotography Stacking workflow (shift/rotate to a base frame) supposedly removes this apparent movement. However, lenses can incorporate a varying degree of optical distortion (barrel/pin-cushion), particularly wide (and superwide) angle lenses, stretching dimensions at the edges of the frames. In effect, stacking results in star trails at the edges of the final image -see attached. How can I use the Affinity built-in library of lens data in the New Astrophotography Stacking (RAW) workflow to remove the distortion provided by my excellent Tokina AT-X Pro 11mm-16mm DXII (shooting at 11mm) before alignment and stacking in New Astrophotography Stacking? Otherwise, should I be shooting in a longer focal length (like 14 or 16mm, losing some field width)? AffinityRenderedReduced.tif

Lenovo IdeaPad Windows 10, and Epson EcoPot L3050 printer - I printed a professional 2Mb square photo out of the Windows Photo app and got the usual excellent quality picture though heavily reduced density (10%) Kb. I wanted to stretch horizontally and maintain density so went into Affinity Photo. AP printed very quickly, correct dimensions, good clarity but with vertical stripes and a red tinge . What happened?