Bring MetaGuide support on-par with PHD


#1

Realized that most of the other threads were not created in the Feature requests section.

I mentioned in another thread I would also like to see tighter integration with MetaGuide to be on-par with the integration that PHD2 currently enjoys.

Graph, mount settling based on pixel and time etc.


#2

Does Meta Guide support SX-AO?


#3

I asked about tighter integration with SGP in the MetaGuide forums. Franks response to me is that he believes he has everything ready to go for this.


#4

As to SX-AO specifically you’d have to get with Frank on Cloudy Nights or AstroGeeks. I know in threads on CN he talks about AO, so it’s a possibility.


#5

What benefits does MetaGuide offer over PHD2, or is this just to offer a wider choice to people?


#6

IMHO that’s like asking “Coke or Pepsi” … Both guiding programs accomplish the goal of guiding the imagine train. My issue is that I would like to use one of these over the other but SGP has tighter integration with one of them over the other.

Realize that you cannot support everything, but PHD and MetaGuide appear (from looking at forum post searches) to be the two most popular.

So the request is more to appeal to a wider range of folks so that we get the benifits offered to some currently.


#7

I also use Metaguide and tighter integration with Metaguide will be great.


#8

I am all for choice but If it is only a matter of taste would the time developing and supporting it not be better spent elsewhere in the app? Or are there specific features or performance benefits?


#9

I’m not sure of the development cycle or roadmap, so I cannot comment on best use of resources.

I can say that for my hardware and setup I get better guiding with MetaGuide, but it’s not as useful because SGP doesn’t account for settling like with PHD. Meaning I have to input an abitrary delay between frames to allow the dither to complete and settle / contrasted with using PHD, SGP is aware of the settling and will start the next frame with the guided reports ready.

For my equipment and depending on the condition and dither settings my mount can take anywhere from 2 seconds to 2 minutes to settle. So if I want to go with MetaGuide (all other things being equal) I have to choose a 2 min delay between subs. Even if the mount settles out one faster. Saving 1 min between subs can add up fast when your taking 360 subs on a target.

I’m using the ZWO 290 mini as the guide cam and a 1600mm-cool for the main imaging camera. The 290 is pretty sensitive (especially when I compare it to my old starshoot), and o have found better guiding results from MetaGuides live video philosophy over PHD’s “longer” exposure philosophy. For whatever reason my Atlas seems to like the smaller more frequent corrections over the less frequent but longer corrections PhD provides.

I’ve played around a little with setting PhD to lower exposure times between 0.1 and 0.5 seconds but it’s not been designed with that same mindset.

So all that wind to say: There’s two philosophy’s when it comes to guiding and these two softwares were designed around them. I posit that for certain hardware combinations one will work out better than the other. Currently SGP has a much tighter integration with one over the other. The author of MetaGuide said that he believes he has everything in place for SGP to offer the same level of integration.

How much time and effort that would take I do not know, nor do I know of it fits into the product roadmap, thus the feature request.


www.mainsequencesoftware.com