The Doc diagnoses your astrophotography defects

Why DocStellar?

Astrophotography is a discipline where the slightest error, a sensor tilted by 0.1 degrees, a failed flat, imperfect tracking, leaves a visible trace on the image. Diagnosing these defects requires the trained eye of an experienced astrophotographer and the patience to compare a photo against hundreds of known examples. DocStellar automates that examination.

You submit your raw frame, your master, or your processed image. The Doc scrutinizes the photo, identifies the defects present, pinpoints their probable causes, and tells you what to do about each one. All in under a minute, with no mandatory sign-up. Here is how it works in detail.

For whom?

• Beginners who want to understand why their photo does not look like the ones on the forums, without having to post and wait for feedback.
• Experienced astrophotographers who want a quick second opinion before committing 4 hours of integration to the stack.
• Curious learners who simply want to learn to recognize sensor tilt, walking noise, or a light pollution gradient.

Every diagnostic made public enriches the astrophotography defect gallery, an annotated example corpus that is as useful for learning as it is for comparing your case to others.

Who is the Doc?

The Doc is an astrophoto diagnostician, powered by a vision-language model trained on thousands of example images. It has been briefed on a taxonomy of 42 common astrophotography defects, organized by family (optics, mechanics, electronics, acquisition, calibration, processing, atmospheric, environmental). For each defect, it knows the visual signature, probable causes, differential diagnoses, and corrections to consider.

Its method

For each submitted image, it identifies the defects present, locates the affected areas, and evaluates severity (from marginal to critical) along with its diagnostic confidence. It does not simply name the problem: it explains why it believes it sees it, where exactly, and how to correct it.

Its transparency

The Doc can be wrong. It may confuse sensor tilt with incorrect backfocus, or attribute to light pollution a gradient that actually results from an imperfect flat. That is why every diagnostic displays an explicit confidence level and a differential diagnosis when several causes are plausible. Treat its recommendations as an informed starting point, not a definitive verdict.