PHD2 is annoying me and I’m getting tired of it. It causes only troubles, failure messages that do not exist, failure messages that the calibration is inaquarate even if done far away from north and the calibration L is absolutely good, guiding curves moving from +3" to -3" after refreshing calibration, always and always and always messages that the dark library does not fit to the selected profile although it is there etc. etc. etc.
My wish is quite big. Could you programm a guiding subroutine into SGP like Maxim DL? I would not care at all to pay more for that. The guiding subroutine in Maxim DL is extremly straightforward, easy to handle and the most important thing is that it always works without any problem.
I am only a PhD in chemistry and no computer scientist. Hence, I cannot estimate how much work that would be. But I am sure this is possible.
Out of interest the Maxim DL algorithm is pretty similar to hysteresis in PHD2, with the hyst parameter turned down. I am always wary of the approch to ‘throw the baby out with the bathwater’.
I have used several guiding programs over the years. I use PHD2 extensively and I just do not recognize the issues you are mentioning. If PHD2 was that unreliable, they would be leaving it in droves. With some mounts, PHD2 would work and MDL5 would be randomly problematic.
You also have to factor that the PHD2 guys, and more to the point, their extensive customer base have ironed out the wrinkles on that program for years. It is unlikely that K&J can better that in a short timescale.
The one area that can be problematic is the interface between SGP and PHD2. If you meddle with PHD2 (like stop / start guiding) while SGP is connected to it, you can blindside SGP. The trick is to let SGP handle PHD2, period.
I did a series of video tutorials on PHD2 - would be glad to try and bottom out your issues - need a little more data on your equipment, guiding method and parameters.
It is highly unlikely that we would ever pull guiding into SGP. There would have to be a highly compelling reason to do so as PHD2 is quite good at what it does.
Whereas I have been pretty happy with PhD2 and have had almost no problems with it, it is also true that having integrated software done by one party is almost always better than that by done two separate entities.
Using PhD2 also assumes that it will always be supported and improved at the same level that it has been so far. That may or may not be true in the future. Personally, I would be a bit uncomfortable depending on an outside source for something mission critical to my software.
In fact, the main reason that I moved to SGP a few years ago is because it did not depend on external programs like other sequencers that depended on FocusMax and MaxIm…
In fact, I have been generally been opposed to the requests made on this forum to allow use of FocusMax with SGP - and for exactly the reason above. So I find it odd that on the one hand folks to not want focus outsourced to FocusMax but on the other hand want to continue to outsource the guiding.
Sure, something like that would be the “highly compelling” reason I mentioned above. But at this time the cost/benefit of creating our own auto guider is just not worth it.
I get that and, as I say, I have not have many issues with PhD2. OTOH, looked at over a period of many years, it always seems to me that freeware and shareware eventually lose their prime movers and fall into an obsolete or poorly supported state. It is something to be prepared for, perhaps…
thanks for your comments.
It is a petty for not incorporating the Maxim DL guiding subroutine into SGP. I would pay whatever Jared and Ken wanted.
PHD2 is working and also guiding well. However, the point are those myriades of mysterious failure messages that do not make a sense at all and that just give me discomfort.
example: I run a calibration towards north and PHD2 gives a message, that ‘guiding parameters may be inacurate due to being to much on the north’. Then I run the calibration more towards equator and PHD2 gives (not exactly the same) a similar message that the calibration may not be precise. Guiding sanity-check shows a very nice and accurate. The mount is slightly imbalanced to avoid backlash.
example: PHD keeps on giving messages that the dark library ‘does not fit with the profile selected’ even if it’s there and I have repeated collecting it for at least 100 times.
example: sometimes guiding goes very accurately within +/- 1", the next evening selecting the same star and after a new calibration towards south the declination moves within +/-3".
With Maxim DL there is never any problem at all. It just works.
I am using the default settings in PHD2 and did not toggle anything. I just made a dark library from 1 to 2 seconds and put the focal length of the guiding scope. That’s it.
Very good argument, I fully agree with you.
The reason why I stoped working with Maxim DL, is that a period re-focus every for instance every 60min is impossible. I tried Maxpilot but there are just too many error messages apearing and constantly something not working properly.
SGP is to my opinion the best and easiest sequenzing software. I like expecially the focus routine very much because it works reliably. So far it is really a petty that it depends on outsource guiding. I am not a computer scientist but I thought that this was easy.
As a commercial software developer, I always hated to depend on a third party products for a critical component but the cost to duplicate something really complicated can rarely be justified. If the PHD2 developers decided to end their support, Ken and Jared would have plenty of time to either take over that support role or add auto guiding to SGP.
I understand that PHD2 should be calibrated somewhere close to the Meridian and the celestial equator , typically I will pick a random star in that area ( see image ) . Although not a fix to the dark’s issue , I have used PHD2 for many years and never used Dark files … I understand the benefits of Darks/Flats in Imaging but never had and issue with PHD2 picking a hot pixel as guide star. PHD2 does it’s job well but it’s easy to become paranoid with tracking graphs , at the end of the day ask yourself are the stars round … One thing that can dramatically affect guiding is that star PHD2 chooses , I have selected by eye a star that gives a better profile than the one PHD2 chooses automatically and all star movements fall withing the 1 arc sec target , choosing the same star on different night you almost guarantee different tracking performance. Soak up the many YouTube video’s on PHD2 , most issues have been ironed out by now
I would always use calibration assistant for at least 3 minutes and accept the recommendations .
I got sick of Phd2 because I have an iOptron CEM60-EC and wanted to end the nightmarish back and forth between iOptron Commander, mount firmware and PHD2. IMHO, none of these are going to win a “Dundee” award.
Purchased a dedicated auto-guider, where you literally (allegedly) push a button.
Lacerta MGEN-3 is my new guider, if I ever get a clear night to test out. Mullti-star guiding and all!
For me I don’t mind pressing a button after centering and having a manual, external, non-integrated device.
