So I don't keep getting the same comments over and over... When I found out about this program there was no videos or anything on the internet at the time which had the pronunciation so I figured I had 2 options, it was either See-quator or Se-qua-tor... I unfortunately chose the a latter... and once a video is up I can't fix it without deleting it and then re-uploading... So please ignore that mistake and focus on the important information that will improve your night photography! Thanks
It doesn't matter how you pronounce the name does it. A rose by any other name is still a rose or as William Shakespeare would say "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet" in other words you can pronounce Sequator as you want but the software still does the job. Thank you for taking the time to make this tutorial.
Found this vid from a link in instagram, and I am happy I did. Been waiting for something like SLS for the PC for a long time and free too. Will be re processing some old files with this over the weekend and looking forward to the results. thanks for posting this.
Great Video Mike! I did a stack last night in SLS, so i just tried Sequator on the same tiffs. I found SLS to stack a little more tightly, render color better and reduce more noise than Sequator. No auto brightness, no hdr, all basic defaults but with freeze ground. Sequator seemed to remove more details from the foreground even tho i masked it out, ideally, it should use just ONE image for the foreground and not stack it at all. Sequator renders five minutes faster than SLS. Need more stacks to test!
Here is a link to some jpg screen shots. www.dropbox.com/sh/vyl7yvbk7c08hg8/AAB8wT_mcOugGY-gm3u6LeF3a?dl=0 The tiffs are huge but i can upload them for you if you like. Both programs shift the color slightly compared to RAWS, I prefer SLS (just a matter of personal taste), as it looks more hi-res, colors are more natural and pleasing and stars looks a bit smaller, perhaps because it stacks tighter. SQ has a touch more contrast, shifts the colors to the right a bit, sky looks a little blacker, shifts oranges more towards yellow and makes blues a bit blacker. I loaded all files into Star images as SQ sets the middle file a the base layer automatically anyway, saves a step. SQ is SO fast! Both great programs. Kudos to SQ tho, I really do need to test with more stacks of course.
Thanks for creating this video, I had previously tried it out but couldn't get it working as well as manually stacking using the Lonelyspeck method. I'll give this a try again as the manual method takes about 45 minutes for me to do.
Great instructional video, Mike. And for what it's worth, I think you're right, it's pronounced "sea- quator" (that because of the word "equator" being in the original word !)
Thanks for this video. I compared Sequetor just now with a Photoshop median stack i did. Comparing them, the colors match quite well; however, Sequetor seemed to reduce sharpness compared to PS. Sequetor did remove more noise than PS did. Perhaps I need to try more settings in Sequetor, but wow, the workflow is much faster than PS.
Thanks for the feedback!! Did you manually align the stars in PS? I've done that before and it can be quite tedious. Sequator was a little softer but I was able to sharpen it without much noise being reintroduced and that was pixel peeping at 3 to 1 magnification. I think overall it is good for people that don't want to manually align in PS, but I also think foregrounds should still be shot separately with longer exposures with lower ISOs for the best results. Thanks for sharing.
Hey Mike, nice vid! I want to say that the banding that is created while stacking has happenned to me before and it (in my experience and my trials and errors opinion) has nothing to do with the program you use. It is caused when you apply the lens profile correction in Lightroom (idk other softwares, i talk about the one i use) and then export those jpegs with the correction applied. I've tried many times to export the jpegs I'm stacking without that lens correction an no banding appeared. If you can try it and test it by yourself it would be nice to make a video about it to spread the word haha
Awesome advice!! I didn't even think of the lens profile correction causing it... Thanks for letting me know. If I come across the issue in the future I will test this out and let people know how to avoid it. Cheers!
Woah! I have an image I stacked together. Everything came out great but there definitely was some noticeable banding in the sky. I assumed I had to do some noise reduction on each image, which helped smooth out that banding but it is still visible if you look for it. Each image DID have lens correction. I'm actually going to go back right now into LR and make sure Lens Correction is OFF for each image, re-stack and see if that solves my banding issue.
Hi Mike Do you edit the photos then stack or stack then edit? What's the correct order of operation. Btw. I love your videos. I consider you one of the best teachers for learning how to shoot the Milky Way and always tell friends to check out your videos. Keep on killing it!
Thanks! "Correct order of operation" is debatable since in reality you can edit your images and then stack or vice-versa. I personally like to stack my images without applying any edit to them other than making sure the white balances all match each other. Some people do the opposite and will do some basic editing, then stack and do some more editing. I find it less time consuming to stack first and then work on a single image. I don't think there is a right or wrong here, just person preference of workflow. Hope that helps! Thanks for watching.
Milky Way Mike thanks for the reply. In my mind I was thinking there was a perceived difference in quality if you worked with the raw files first and edited them then used sequitor to stack. Sounds like there isn’t so this will help a lot because I’m compositing a foreground into the image. So I can stack, bring both the stacked Milky Way and foreground into photoshop and do the magic there.
Well i went for my very first time to take pics of the milkyway. I am super happy with my low quality pics because it was my FIRST TIME! now. my second time will be infinitely better but i didn't know you were supposed to stack at different isos' which does make sense now that i have watched this video. hope you have a video explaining the whole thing rather than the one i found, which skipped the info about stacking.
You don't need to stack with different ISOs... I keep mine all the same so for example when I am shooting pictures of the Milky Way and I plan on stacking my settings are: 14mm wide F3.2 ISO 5000 Shutter 15 Seconds. Sometimes my shutter is ISO 6400.... But whatever choose it stays the same for all of the shots I take that are getting stacked. Usually I take 10-15 photos to stack.
@@Milkywaymike ok so i wasn't clear bc i am a newbie, why to take so many shots at the same settings but i was told that the editing program actually reduces noise with a large quantity of shots. which now it makes sense.
Hello .. great video ... as always .. sorry for my english .. just a question ... in your opinion SEQUATOR could add even more photos taken with star tracker? or, given the greater displacement of the Milky Way, does the software fail to align them? thanks a lot
Massimiliano Franco there is a limitation on how many photos you can add. I’m not sure the exact number since it may vary depending on exposure length. At some point it will struggle to align the stars. Secondly, yes, you can align star tracked images with sequator.
Hi, to stack the ground long exposure at lower ISO, what software did you use? Sequator can also handle that process if you Highlight the ground instead of the sky?
You can stack any style of image using programs like photoshop or Affinity photo.... Sequator is specifically for night images, however you may be able to stack non-night images as well. When using Affinity or Photoshop just convert the images to a smart object then go to stack mode- "mean" or "median".
Hey Mike. Thanks again for all your great info. Milky way season is coming fast :) I just bought a star tracker to enhance my exposure and lower my ISO. I would like to do as you did in another video: stacking foreground shots to reduce noise and blend them with a nice milky way shot. But I was wondering, with a star tracker, should I do multiple shots ? Or just a long shot at low ISO (like 4-5 min, ISO 800-1000) should do the trick ? Also, if you think that multiple shots of tracked milky way is a good idea, I am confused of what options to select on Sequator. My foreground will be blurry in all the tracked shots, so should I check freeze ground or not in this case ? Not clear in my head.. Is sequator good enough to discard the blurry foregrounds ? Thanks in advance :) and keep up the good job !
You can stack your tracked shots of the milky way. I do this as well... So typically I take (5x) 2 minute exposures with my tracker (it starts trailing off if I go too long) and then I stack it in Starry landscape stacker even with the blurry landscape. the landscape being blurry shouldn't be an issue. I haven't tested this in Sequator but I imagine it would be the same as Starry landscape stacker. Worst case scenario you just crop out the foreground and try stacking the stars only.
Here is the manual for sequator which I believe you can use Raw files in the program. The other option is to export TIFF files from lightroom which will maintain the quality of your image as well. sites.google.com/site/sequatorglobal/manual
Hey Mike, Thanks for these awesome tutorials. I am planning to shoot the Milkyway at Palo Duro SP, Amarillo Tx next April. Wanted to try out some panos and image stacking like you have shown on your other videos. Please let me know about how to change the camera angle when switching to the lower or horizon frames from the sky frames? I am using a standard standard carbon fiber manfrotto and don’t have any levelers. When I switch from the upper frames to the lower ones do I just drop the camera on the ball head maintaining the position of the camera as best as I can manually? Or is there a better way? Should I invest in any gear? Gear I will be using canon 5d mkiii, manfrotto cf tripod and an intervalometer. Thanks again.
Logan Beach yes, when using a stacking programs it is best to take consecutive photos at the same settings. If you stop to change the settings it may make it harder for the software to track the stars due to the constant rotation of the Earth.
Vince Nouel Balana no that won’t work. You need to take multiple photos. The pixels in a single photo are all the same so it won’t do anything. Pixels shift slightly in separate images which allows you to reduce noise when stacking
I tried installing the C++ library, but it tells me I can't install C++ (64) because it's already installed. Don't want to uninstall it because C++ is necessary for Lightroom to work. Then tried to install Sequator, and it wouldn't start because it says all the .dll files are missing. Seems like a Catch-22. Any ideas for a fix? Would love to be able to use this program. Thanks for the video.
@@Milkywaymike I got it to work! Removed and reinstalled MS Visual C++ and after a few reboots, I got my first semi-decent image of the Milky Way overhead. And Lightroom and Photoshop still work. Thanks for the video, subscribed!
Hey Mike, I have tried photographing Milkyway just now. I used a T5i, 18-55 kit lens @ 18mm f/3.5 and 20sec exposure. I took 10 shots and stacked in sequator. However I could not see the milkyway in a single pic like how its visible in yours even before editing. I would be visiting an observatory this weekend, so any tips?
Saikrishna Chaitanya what was your ISO? At 3.5 and 20 seconds you will need to push your iso up to 6400 - 10,000 for the Milky Way ... the news will be high in the foreground so I would take lower iso exposures for the foreground with a 3-6 minute shutter
Luís Conde I’m not sure about that.. I think it’s specifically designed for milky way tracking and stacking... but I could be wrong. I believe their is a user manual on the sequator creators website which should have more info.
do you know why the stacked images have a much lower resolution of the original frames? it is about 50% the original resolution... that's a bummer... :(
Thats weird... I don't use sequator that much since I work with an iMac but can you check your output settings in Sequator. I did not have this issue when working with my files. Make sure you are outputing as a 16bit TIFF file to give you maximum control over your image as well.
I’ve got one question when taking the images for the stack should they be all the same as far as camera settings or should you take some with maybe a higher ISO and some at a lower ISO?
You want to keep your settings the same because when you are taking the images for the stack they need to be taken in succession. If you are changing settings your allowing time to pass in between shots so the stars may not align well in the software. Also you risk bumping your camera if you are manually changing your settings which can make it harder for you to align the images. Stacking software does allow "Dark Frames' which you can take after your light frames. So for that you would take your 10 images for that you are going to stack and then put your lens cap on the lens and take 5 to 10 dark frames with EXACTLY the same settings. This is important so the hot pixels are in the same spot and the dark frames will be used to remove noise and hot pixels in the stacking software. Dark frames are a new addition in stacking software so I will do a tutorial on that in the future.
If you are getting dll errors, You need to install the C++ library. This is covered in the instructions on the download page and Mike also mentioned this in the video.
Hi, does this manually alight the images? I was thinking about that since there will be difference with the each shot due to the earth rotation. Please enlighten me. appreciate it!
Yea, the software separates the foreground from the sky. Then it aligns the stars, stacks them to reduce noise, stacks the foreground to reduce noise and then combines the 2 stacked images back together to create a cleaner night image with sharp stars.
Yeah sure thing! This is how I combine stacked foreground images with stacked / tracked software images like Sequator or SLS. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-StBQNgKanxw.html
Typically you wouldn't because it may affect the exposure level (either darker or lighter). Also when you stack using sequator or Starry landscape stacker, you want the pictures to be consecutive... want to shoot one after the other quickly so the stars don't change too much in the sky. The more amount of time between shots makes it harder for the software to align the stars.
In DSS there will be the dark and bias included in stacking to reduce the noises. How about in Sequator? any dark or bias needed to be included? as Sequator don't have these items ....
Tan KT I didn’t use any darks or bias when testing sequator and I was still impressed with the results. I think their is a way to add darks but I haven’t tested that out yet, since I typically use starry landscape stacker on a mac. My pc laptop is crappy so I rarely stack with sequator
Yeah, when I found out about this program there was no videos or anything on the internet at the time which had the pronunciation so I figured it was see-quator or se-qua-tor... I chose the a latter lol
It is PC only... for macbook get STARRY LANDSCAPE STACKER ($40) and totally worth it! I use starry landscape stacker a lot but people complained because they didn't have anything for Window / PC. Sequator is finally available for those that use PC computers. CHECK OUT SLS --> ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-ZPYMJTrZmbI.html
Yeah, when I found out about this program there was no videos or anything on the internet at the time which had the pronunciation so I figured it was see-quator or se-qua-tor... I chose the a latter... unfortunately once a video is up I can't fix it without deleting it and re-uploading.