@Xplode Please download and install v1.11 again. The bug should now be corrected.
@Ken That sounds great! While this was a minor thing that I could correct quickly, having access to your debug JSON data would make it more robust for sure.
Here is an AF debug log. It will be on in the next beta (and forward). Let me know if it would be helpful to see other data in there (or if there is bogus data in there).
1 Like
Thanks for sharing this Ken!
That looks great for extracting relevant AF data, much more robust! I have to think this through a bit, particularly how to make sure the my program is backward compatible. I am thinking that it should be able to open older standard logs, and then these debug ones starting from SGP v3.1 when it is released. It is simple I guess to detect that it is opening a standard logfile, as there is an identifier in the beginning telling the SGP version. To see that it is a debug file is less evident to me. Could you add a header line preceding the JSON data indicating an AF debug file and the SGP version generating it? Or if you have a better suggestion maybe?
As for the JSON data itself, could you please add the number of detected stars for each exposure in the “Datapoints” data? Also, it would be nice to know if a particular AF run is part of a running sequence. Maybe add a FocusTarget entry with a string of the target name?
Realistically I will have take some time to digest this and figure out how to best switch to this new format, but for future compatability this is surely the way to go!
Thanks, Mikael
I think this would work for you:
var isAfLogFile = File.ReadLines("theChosenFile.txt").First().StartsWith("{");
Yes
Easy enough
same
Some of the latest beta releases crashed the Logviewer. We have now tested the beta up to beta 307. So if you experience problems please re-download v1.11 from Sourceforge.
Mikael
Could you add the ability to include focus runs that weren’t complete/verified to be good in SGP AutoFocus Viewer?
Being able to add runs that weren’t good would make it easier to help diagnose focus runs from people not getting consistent good results.
1 Like
Did you try to check ‘Show all runs’? An example is here: Auto focus giving strange V - curves - #6 by bulrichl - SGPro Support - Main Sequence Software
With this setting LogViewer also shows user-aborted and failed AF runs.
Bernd
To use this feature that Bernd talks about you’ll need to start the program from the command line with the switch “-o”. If people find this useful I’ll include it as default in the program.
Mikael
2 Likes
Hey mikaelA,
Superb programming, many thanks.
May I make a simple request, is there any chance of adding an option to set the path/directory for the location that SGP’s log files are written, it’s very laborious having to manually go to: “C:\Users\********\AppData\Local\SequenceGenerator” every time just to get to the logs.
Many Thanks
Paul
Thanks Paul!
The path of the last opened logfile is saved each time the program is closed down, and in principle next time you start the program it should remember this and show the files of that path! It works on my two machines (Win7 and 10). I have no real clue why that wouldn’t work for you. Do you have admin rights on your Win account ?
Mikael
I looked at the code, and it looks like this got broken at some point. Still, on my computer the path is saved automatically, don’t know why though, some properties of the open file dialog class are a bit unclear. Ok, I will hardcode into it to save the path at closure.
@mikaelA this is really great software you’ve provided, many thanks!
How are people using the temperature compensation when different filters have different coefficients?
|Filter Lum|: a = 742.9 steps/deg,|b = 25536 steps, SGP factor: -742.9 steps/deg|
|Filter Red|: a = 697.6 steps/deg,|b = 25822 steps, SGP factor: -697.6 steps/deg|
|Filter Green|: a = 718.6 steps/deg,|b = 25590 steps, SGP factor: -718.6 steps/deg|
|Filter Blue|: a = 723.5 steps/deg,|b = 25490 steps, SGP factor: -723.5 steps/deg|
|Filter OIII|: a = 713.1 steps/deg,|b = 25194 steps, SGP factor: -713.1 steps/deg|
|Filter SII|: a = 736.4 steps/deg,|b = 25212 steps, SGP factor: -736.4 steps/deg|
|Filter Ha|: a = 721.7 steps/deg,|b = 25379 steps, SGP factor: -721.7 steps/deg|
The average is about -722. That said, there wasn’t much temperature variation last night (I did an autofocus run only last night… 155 separate autofocus runs across the 7 filters!)… only about 7.5 C --> 4.5 C over the course of the night. If I want to use the temp compensation feature, should I use the average? I imagine it should be close enough.
I suspect the filters themselves all have a rather similar temperature coefficient and I should re-run an autofocus-only run again sometime when there’s a little more temperature variation to gain some better data across a bigger spread of temperature. Are most people finding this to be the case, that all their filters have pretty similar coefficients?
The filters should be pretty close in terms of coefficients. Do you know what your critical focus zone is in steps? You might even be within it for the range you have there.
Jared
I don’t expect either that different filters (or colors) would have significantly different temperature shifts in the focus position. So yes generally you can take the average. And as Jared pointed out, you always should compare the magnitudes, of both the linear coefficients and the filter offset positions, with the CFZ, to see if the differences are relevant or not.
I guess you did cycle through filters ?
The red filter coefficient looks a bit low, with respect to the average, maybe there were some outliners in that particular data set ? Look at the linear regressions, if you think some of the data sets align better to a straight line, you might only include thoose in the average.
In any case, I’ll include a calculation of the average if more than one filter is used, makes sense, for the next release.
Mikael
Thanks @Jared and @mikaelA. My critical focus zone for my blue filter is 292 steps so all filters are well within that. I did rotate through all filters throughout the night, LRGBOSH, so they were exposed to the same environment more or less.
It’s interesting about the red filter being off a bit. The other night imaging under great moonless conditions I noticed my red subs were a bit softer than green and blue despite refocusing right before red. I’ll have to keep investigating that one.
FYI Red for me is always a bit bloated due to my imaging conditions, the focusing looks identical for me on all my filters (i focus per filter)
Hi Mikael,
I downloaded the log viewer. How/Where do I locate the log after a run?
Thanks,
Bill
Mikael,
How do I enable the Auto Focus Log Viewer?
Thanks,
Bill
I replied to your other thread:
Jared
Thanks Jared,
I found the log files, just was not sure how/when it worked.
Learn something new every day!
B