SGPro 3.1 and Early 4.0 News

Actually, I passively use google drive at the moment to cloud sync all my data. I run from a remote obsy and any sort of cloud integration, I will be excited for! Awesome news!

Also, clamouring for API enhancements…

Cheers

And that seems perfectly fair. And I see the wisdom of your point…if there’s lots of API need, then should the software be doing something better?

Your answer suggests (at least as I read it…I could well be wrong) that the API is generally thought of as a way to expose some sort of functionality.

Perhaps there’s another “point of view”? In that the API exposes information about what’s happening. Just as one example, I have a “status page” for my observatory…it tells me weather info, power usages, and so on…and it also offers information from SGP’s API on what gear is connected, what it’s doing, and so on.

I feel like making that aspect of things more robust and complete could present a ton of opportunities to others for things like customizing alerting to their own needs, “quick glance” looks at what’s happening, real time log viewers (or loggers even!) and so on.

Again…I see where you’re coming from, and I respect your desire to provide desired functionality through the application. I would just welcome being able to ET&L complete obs/session info for my own responses/visualizations. :slight_smile:

I see an API as a way for sophisticated expert users to obtain specialist functionality for their specific situation. Many of the requests seem to me to come into that category.

Using an API for that sort of thing will reduce complexity because most people won’t need it and even those that do will not need such an extensive UI.

We used to put quite a lot of hooks into automation applications for this reason, we couldn’t forsee every way the product would be used or what the hardware might require.

2 Likes

Dual scope and camera is a big ask from many folks, myself included. Clear sky time is valuable and many astrophotographers have two scope/camera setups on the same mount to double their data capture.

1 Like

Is the posibility to change the phd2 connection port implemented in this release?
Because I have 2 setups, I wanna use 2 instances of sgp, each one with its own instance of phd2, like in APT and NINA.

1 Like

Ken, could you expand a bit on the point below please?

Better support for extremely large sequences (better memory management for SGPro targets)

At the moment, I think the largest Fov allowable in the FMW is only about 20 degrees. I’ve long been wanting an automated solution for doing very large mosaics, e.g 50 panels with a 135mm lens. At the moment, AFAIK, there is no software package out there that can do this.

Is this the kind of thing you are talking about above? If so, then I would upgrade to v4 tomorrow :grinning:

1 Like

Thanks for the update, Ken. It all looks like good stuff, but I have to say that I’m a bit disappointed that there won’t be anything else regarding improving autofocus in the foreseeable future. The re-run feature will be useful, but for those cases where autofocus simply does not work well, re-running the routine won’t help much. I got the impression from the numerous threads requesting improvements to AF such as outlier rejection and ROI selection that these were actively being investigated. From what I have read on the other forums, this is the primary reason people are choosing other software over SGP.

Tim

1 Like

SGP 4.0 listed numerous AF improvements

D’oh! Sorry. Missed that.

Tim

Wow, I am so looking forward to the AF improvements in Ver 3.1 and 4.0 as well as the multicamera support. Very exciting. I am tired of all the basing SGP gets in CN and everyone saying to try NINA or Voyager. I just dont see it. These updates will kill a lot of noise out there.

Do you have any tentative release data for V3.1?

1 Like

Dear Ken,
Thank you for the update. I am glad to see the continous improvement to the platform.

A question: do you have intention to fix the “center here hyperstar bug soon? This one has been documented in many posts and we discussed about it last NESFS. But yet I don’t see it in any intention update.

This one might not cover many users, but believe me, it is a constant pain.

Thank you,

Yanick

I too see little to no use of the cloud/community based features for 4, however I think we all want a better focus implementation.
To a lesser degree but I need it desperately since long, true multicamera support, a request I’ve seen passed many times.
Last but not least true switch support is also very important!
And as always, less is more, also in development.
(cloud integration is already “the case” you can perfectly instruct any cloud based solution to sync data and or presets I’ve been doing that all along with my remote)
/Yves

1 Like

I have to agree with Yves. I’m very excited about the new release, but I already use the cloud for my profiles, sequences and data, so I don’t understand what spending time implementing such a feature directly in to SGP will do for us - perhaps the time would be better spent on other feature requests?

1 Like

I’ve used the cloud on other applications and if you operate across multiple devices it is very useful for exchanging data seamlessly. As a user you don’t need to pay attention to what device the data is collected on, it’s available everywhere with no effort.

It could also be easy to implement because the cloud provider may supply a decent API that allows it to be integrated with little effort.

An improved focus system may be very useful but could be considerably more difficult, not least because there doesn’t seem to be much consensus about what an improved focus system would deliver.

1 Like

It’s already in the current 3.1 Beta which you can download today.

This is referring to number of targets/events and not the FOV of the Framing and Mosaic Wizard. Like for people that enjoy loading up 20+ targets in SGP.

The current FOV limit is not something we can change at the moment.

Not at the moment…we’re trying to squash a few bugs and then we’ll likely push it out. But having said that we haven’t started on the Auto Focus improvements either. But most everything else in that list has been completed.

I’m not going to go into the Cloud features that we’re considering as I don’t like giving false hope or previewing things that we end up deciding against. Right now it’s an idea…like a little bundle of gas in the Orion nebula, but saving Profiles and Settings is primarily being done as an initial jumping off point for a much grander vision. We feel this will have the same impact as the Framing and Mosaic Wizard had many years ago…a truly innovative feature which people don’t want to be without (which others have now blatantly copied). It will drastically change your imaging (if you so desire)

Thanks,
Jared

For 4.x I personally would like to see SGP move away from relying on 3rd party applications even if you have a great partnership.

Having built in auto guiding, calibration and polar alignment support would be wonderful.

@mpfjr

I can’t see asking Ken and Jared to invest several hundred hours of software development time to duplicate functions that already exist. PHD2 Guiding is an excellent auto guider product and there are many great polar alignment tools available – QHY’s Polemaster being an especially useful product.

Charlie

3 Likes

So you don’t see the threads posted to these forums where people have various problems with SGP and PHD2 working together reliably?

Are you not aware that when one piece of software is updated opposed to the other that things can break until someone releases a new version to fix it?

Having things under the same roof helps.

Very true in an ideal world, however

This is not an ideal world and Ken and Jarod don’t have unlimited time or resources. Developing a PHD2 replacement is a vast new project.
Better they spend a little time refining the support for PHD2. If there are problems they will need logs that show a reproducible problem.

And Ken, I really appreciate this update on your thoughts for the new releases.

Although I am very happy with SGP, I have dabbled with NINA and found I don’t feel at home with it.
I have pretty good focus runs “most” of the time but a few are out of the range and it defaults to last position, rarely being at a “bad” focus position.
Of course I would embrace any auto focus improvements.

www.mainsequencesoftware.com