Jump to content

stargazine_ep44_banner.thumb.jpg.6153c4d39ed5a64b7d8af2d3d6061f61.jpg

Recommended Posts

Hi All, I am posting what I suspect is a newbie mistake question but hoping that someone can assist with the issue of flats.

Although I have been fumbling around the sky, taking snaps at leisure, recently I became serious.  I have read up about the different calibration files (flats, darks, bias) and they seemed to make sense; different ways to capture the image defects and extract those from the image of the sky. After a few weeks (months) of further fumbling I went back to the very first target to receive my attention, M42 Orion Nebula.

In short, I took 20x 30s exposures in LRGB  and ran these along with 20x LRGB each of darks, bias and flats. To obtain the flats I used a diffuse sheet of perspex (lightbox material) and an LED video lamp that has 180 white LEDs, turned to its lowest setting. Attached below is the stacked Luminance flat and the light image. In the lights I am getting very strong marks from dust and I had thought that the flats would subtract this but looking at the flats the marks are completely different shapes and do nothing to remove them from the lights.

The attached has been further stretched to show the issue. Now, I am obviously doing something wrong but I have no idea what, any pointers from the vast pool of knowledge will be much appreciated.

Thanks, Anthony

 

flat-FILTER_Lum-BINNING_1 Stretched.jpg

light-FILTER_Lum-BINNING_1.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

The important thing with calibration frames is that settings should be matched to the lights they are going to be used with. In the case of flats it is essential that the optical train is not moved in any way, especially in terms of the camera rotating with respect to the optical tube. So, with your images above, were the flats taken with the camera and telescope in exactly the same alignment?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The donut on the bottom and two on the left hand side appear to be in roughly the right places, but are quite a bit smaller than their equivalents on the light. So I'm wondering if there was some change in focus between the two? [there mustn't be]

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

To add to Gav's comment, you mention you have taken 20 x LRGB each dark and bias frames.  This isn't necessary as your darks and bias frames should be taken with the OTA covered to let in no light at all, so are not needed for each filer.  You just need to make sure they are taken at the same sensor temperature as your light frames.

I could be reading this wrong of course and you do mean just 20 of each and don't mean for each filter.

Edited by RayD
Link to post
Share on other sites

If it was me, I'd be pre-emptive and get a camera sensor cleaning kit (blower, brushes, solution etc) and carefully clean the sensor window and also check the filters. Maybe give the filter wheel a good blow out as well. It's better to not have the dust donuts there in the first place as those ones look quite difficult to remove. Newts however are always open to contamination. Maybe a light pollution filter or clear filter in the nosepiece to 'seal' your imaging train?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless you have permenant set up, I would take the flats at the end of the imaging session, so the focus will be the same. As you point out, a set of flats for each filter should be taken as the dust motes will be different on each filter and these are pretty close to the camera sensor.

+1 for having your optical train as dust free as possible.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for your replies. After posting I realised I had missed some detail out so to fill in and answer a few questions posed. 

Firstly as to LRGB, I took 20x each for darks and lights and 50x each for bias. I knew this was overkill but the Pixinsight BatchPreprocessing script didn’t bat an eyelid and produces me a set of master calibration files (this was the first time I had used PI).

I have a permanent setup so the scope was left in place while the darks were taken, immediately after the lights using the same SGP sequence but with the end caps on and lights (and pc monitor) off. @PhotoGav & @tomatoThe flats were done the following day with absolutely nothing moved, including focus. I set up a lamp and diffuser and took the flats using the same camera temperature of -15 but the ambient would have been higher, not sure if this is enough to have made a difference.  Now here’s something: the exposure of the flats was only 40ms due to the amount of light from the lamp, could that be it? Should I be trying to get the light down to a level where 30s exposure is not blown out to white? 

After taking the flats I figured I had nothing much to lose and so experimented to find the source of the doughnuts. Image train is as follows: Into the 2” eyepiece I have a new filter wheel (and new filters). Connected to this is a Baader coma corrector that is screwed onto the front of the camera. Firstly, altering the focus did not alter the doughnut shape in any way. Nor did changing the filters or rotating the camera&wheel. With everything attached I then slightly unscrewed the camera from the corrector and still no change or rotation; this tells me the dust is on the camera. There is a glass screen over the sealed sensor although I cannot see anything on it I am hoping the debris is only on the outside as I do not relish the idea of opening up the sensor to the air.

Agreed that it is better to clean the imaging train and not have to correct for these and I like you suggestion @david_taurus83 of the light pollution filter, this could attach to the thread at the end of the focus tube and seal the whole thing. I am still puzzled as to the difference, as you say @Demonperformer the doughnuts do correspond in location and intensity to the marks in the lights but I am baffled as to why they are a different shape. In tapping this reply out I am beginning to think it is connected to the exposure and perhaps I should try exposing flats with a much lower light level and aim to get nearer to 30s exposure, perhaps a single LED And a couple of diffusion sheets. I would be interested to hear how others do this and what exposures.

Than you all for your comments. Will be spending some time today cleaning up the camera as this is the ultimate answer.

Anthony

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am slightly confused about what calibration files you generated and which you actually needed to generate! Did you take darks and bias for each filter? If so, that is completely unnecessary. You only need one set of darks and one set of bias as no light is passing through the filters, so the filters are irrelevant. You do need flats for each filter used (some say you can get away with a ‘universal flat’, but I would not advocate that). Regarding light levels and exposures for flats... you should aim for about 30000 to 32000 ADU or just shy of half way along the histogram, so the exposure value itself is not important, just use a value and a light level that gives you that ADU result. 

I have no idea why your flats don’t work with your data though... from what you say, they should. All I can suggest is that it is down to the processing. Could you share the data set through Dropbox or something and I would be happy to have a go at processing it to see if the problem persists or not.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Anthony. On a separate issue, I'm a bit confused about your coma corrector spacing. If it's the Baader MPCC then it's optimised for 55mm from its flange to your sensor. Have you mounted this between your camera and filter wheel? I would have gone: Scope - MPCC - 16.5mm M42 spacer - 20mm filter wheel - ASI174MM 17.5mm from nosepiece to sensor. This gives you 54mm spacing which is pretty close in itself but glass adds back focus as well. So with your filters and the protective glass in front of your sensor you could assume the extra 1mm required for 55mm. Again, this is all assuming you have the MPCC. If so, the MPCC would act as the seal in the image train, keeping dust, pollen, bugs even out of system!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Gavin.

Rather sheepishly yes, took 20x darks for each filter and also took 50x bias for each filter too!  Thought it might have been overkill but dont think it did any harm other than using up a chunk of my NAS drive space.  Is it ok to have a master bias and dark and how often should it be updated?

As regards flats, I had seen a Pixinsight tutorial which talked about a master or universal flat but was not entirely convinced; your comment is heeded, flats each time.  Your comment on exposure of the flats is encouraing, I had read about ADU and didnt understand it but selected an exposure that showed the peak approximately in the middle of the histogram. I will have a closer look at this before the next attempt.

I appreciate your offer to have a go at the processing and have copied the original capture data into Dropbox but caution that the folder is almost 1.4Gb. It can be access by this link: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/l6cydc3lirz083i/AAADMKS3AziIdqMUvIG9DChua?dl=0

Cheers, Anthony

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Best not to have too short an exposure time for your flats, better to dim the light source by whatever means, the low tech solution of putting sheets of A4 printer paper in front of the light source works. Also if you have options for how the data is transferred off the chip, be sure to use the same one as you use for your lights, my software has a fast preview mode and a slower low noise mode, I had problems when I mixed the two.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi David

Your comment is extremely helpful as this is something I have struggled with a lot. Yes it is the MPCC, purchased nearly four years ago for my first VX8 on the advice of Orion Optics but could not understand where to fit it. Unfortunately not long after I had an accident and replaced the scope and mount as part of an insurance claim.  The second VX8 was purpose made (upgraded to 1/12 pv) and colimation seemed much better so stars were more round but still not ideal so I dug out the corrector again. I read about the 55mm spacing but it was not clear whether this was from the sensor surface, the glass front, flange or what.  I took it to be 55mm from lens to sensor and then guessed as to how it should fit.  

I am going outside to have a look at this and see if I have enough bits to make it work as you suggest.  

Cheers, Anthony

Link to post
Share on other sites

@tomato  Good point about the usb speed, I am not sure if I checked this and will have a look at the settings. The capture was done in SGPro and I think that the speed is setup in the equipment profile and this was used for both light and flat capture; worth checking again though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I've had a play with the Luminance data and have obtained exactly the same result as you... which is good and bad! At least it's not an issue with processing (or perhaps we both have it wrong!). My best guess is that the mark left at the bottom of the frame is a drop of condensation on the chip window - it has a sort of thickness to the bottom of it as if a drop of water has gathered there. Have you had a chance to look and see what is on the chip window? Is there lots of rubbish on it?

Sorry I can't be of more help and good luck with sorting this one out...

Stacked_L.thumb.png.0731fb7efbc32b0ebfc22e2e03554ecd.png

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Gavin, that is actually very encouraging; this is my first foray into "proper" LRGB imaging, first use of SGPro, first use of Pixinsight and one of the first uses of my re-configured  observatory too.  If we are both getting similar results that shows me my processing and basic understanding is good and that the problem lies somewhere physically in the system.

I have not yet had chance to take a detailed look at the camera but having done some elimination work I am certain that it is an issue with the camera, either on the surface of the glass or inside the sensor chamber - this would explain the droplet look to the small mark at the lower edge.  If the rain eases up a bit I will bring the camera in and have a good close look at it.  I remain baffled as to why the flats do not resemble the defects in the lights but the ultimate answer has to be to remove the defects in the first instance, before capturing anything and this has to be my focus (pun intended).

I appreciate all the comments and assistance posted in response, thank you.

Anthony

Link to post
Share on other sites

My pleasure - I know how frustrating it is trying to get kit up and running and am constantly relying on other people to help with my own system, so it is good to be able to try and help others too.

I look forward to hearing what you find in the camera!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I have just had a good look into the sensor chamber with a strong light and a magnifying glass. There were dust motes on the outer surface of the glass and after blowing these away I could see a tiny speck on the sensor and another on the inside of the glass. Nothing for it but to open the chamber. Inside there are four desiccant tablets and it could be that the small specks came from those. After some careful use of the air pump (the tablets are very light) and reassembly it looks like I have eliminated most of the marks; certainly the prominent ones at least although there is a small one remaining in the middle of the image. 

Now I must wait for some dry weather to have another go at imaging and producing a new set of calibration files but I am much more optimistic, especially after Gavins efforts which confirmed I wasn’t doing everything wrong.

Cheers, 

Anthony

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 25/11/2018 at 11:53, david_taurus83 said:

Hi Anthony. On a separate issue, I'm a bit confused about your coma corrector spacing. If it's the Baader MPCC then it's optimised for 55mm from its flange to your sensor. Have you mounted this between your camera and filter wheel? I would have gone: Scope - MPCC - 16.5mm M42 spacer - 20mm filter wheel - ASI174MM 17.5mm from nosepiece to sensor. This gives you 54mm spacing which is pretty close in itself but glass adds back focus as well. So with your filters and the protective glass in front of your sensor you could assume the extra 1mm required for 55mm. Again, this is all assuming you have the MPCC. If so, the MPCC would act as the seal in the image train, keeping dust, pollen, bugs even out of system!

Hi David. Well I had a good look at the whole imaging train and also found a M42 male to male connector in the box of the filter wheel. This means that I can now fit MPCC directly to the filter wheel, the M42 connector and then the camera, giving me 54.5mm from the MPCC flange to the sensor.

Excited to try this out if only the weather would clear!!

Thanks for your help with this aspect, it has been a troubling point for some time.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

^^^ Glad I could help and I hope it improves things for you. Just to point out, the configuration you've quoted above. It may indeed be fine but it might be better to mount your camera as close to the filters as possible to avoid vignetting. So you could put the M42 connector on the MPCC and then the filter wheel/camera? It's dependant on your sensor size.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Aha, success!  With the very helpful advice on here I took the whole lot apart and started again. Starting with the scope collimation, re-positioning the coma corrector, cleaning sensor, cover, filters and corrector. After re-assembly and a lot of cloudy nights, I finally managed to get a good go at this last night and the results are so much better. 

M42_LRGB.thumb.jpg.769f8f81cfdd6d6ae6ac9a4287be5ca7.jpg

 

I have almost eliminated false dark marks and those that remained were removed by the flats.  This is my first attempt at processing with Pixinsight and although it is not perfect, I am very pleased with it.

M42_L.thumb.jpg.13430e22842dea58765deb023500dbec.jpg

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

You are absolutely right. A few weeks ago I was getting so despondent, the whole lot nearly went onto AstroBuySell and my wife was starting to question my sanity. Then, while imaging this at the weekend, everything fell into place and it was thrilling to see it come together at the processing phase; very satisfying and reminded me why I get into astronomy in the first place.

Thank you to everyone for their help and comments.  Wishing you all clear, calm, dark nights and a Merry Christmas.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By TakMan
      Still sorting the (new to me), Atik 16200 imaging train as I try to shift from my trusty SBIG 8300, Mac to PC for mount control/capture and from a separate guide scope to the Atik OAG....
      The camera needs to go back to Atik (awaiting the email from Vince) as there is dust inside the chamber, so this is a good time to get everything checked - ready for the autumn season.
      After some imaging/testing time at the rear of Leo in the last week, I noticed on my flat frames a strange half moon light - by the dust mote (that was over-correcting the lights).

      Eventually I worked out it was the screws surrounding the sensor cover window (or the 3x rounded cap screws that attach the EFW3), bouncing the light onto the back of the filter (Baader L in this example) and I suppose onto the cover window and onto the sensor. To test the theory, I opened the imaging train up and added a Sharpie pen to them. Couldn't get into the cross-heads with the pen, but with re-testing, the reflection had gone! Perhaps it would never be an issue with the actual light frames, but you never know with a bright star in the frame of a future target...?
      So today, after shifting slightly outwards the OAG stalk, I addressed the stainless steel screws 'properly', by (again), taking everything apart and lightly painting a cover of matt black acrylic paint over them and into the x-heads (a bit of overspill), nothing too heavy-handed as I didn't want to glue the things in with paint! The finished effect is duller than the pic here and the reflection has gone after another round of testing.

      Always something to catch us out, hey!? Why Atik can't use black screws is another matter.....
      Perhaps this may help others out at some stage....
      Damian
    • By alexbb
      This is another finished target for this season.
      I (quite) recently bought a TS Photoline 102 ED with FPL53 which performs surprisingly well for a doublet. So I put it to tests and imaging, in parallel with an older FPL51 AstroProfessional 102 ED doublet.
      The blue color correction is much better in the newer TS. I shoot luminance often with both and then take the highlights from the better scope.
      For this image I also used some older data that I had available, shot with a 130PDS, but that maybe only made my life more difficult. Not that otherwise I shot data through the refractors in a single panel with reducers/correctors, but also in 2 panels with no reducing correctors. Same about the RGB. Some shorter exposures from the backyard, some from a dark site, most of the G data from a dark site, B and R from home (clouds came in at the dark site) and a lot of other adventures.
      But in the end I managed to put them all together and made an image out of them.
      You can watch it in full resolution and see other details on astrobin: Great Orion Nebula
      Clear skies!
      Alex

    • By astrobena
      Hey everyone,
      Over the past few days i've been gathering data on M31 due to the battery not lasting long and andomeda dissapearing behind a tree, therefore the mulitple imaging sessions. So far i've been out and me being me, only took dark, bias and light frames for the first 2 sessions but for the last one i also included flats... (The lights all have very slightly different settings cause i have been experimenting slightly... that being 45sec @ ISO 400, 45sec @ ISO 200 and 50sec @ ISO 100) Now DSS assinged all the correct bias and dark frames to the corresponding light frames but because i only have flats for my last imaging session it applied those to all the different light frames and not just to the last set...(and due to me moving the telescope / taking the camera off, the dust spots have obviously been moving around and that therefor dont work at all for the other light frames...) So my question: Is there any way in DSS to apply flats to only one set of light frames and if not are there any other apps with which i can do this with?
      Many Thanks!
    • By StarGazingSiouxsie
      Hi,
      Can you help me solve this mystery, please?
      I have a 2020 Celestron 8" Edge Evolution Ltd Edition 60 Anniversary model. The OTA is carbon fibre and some of the artwork is different but for in tents & purposes it's a standard 8" Edge Evolution
      The Problem
      The problem is, when the mount is switched off. the telescope will not maintain its calibration between Star Sense (SS) camera and the OTA. Please not I am not talking a SS alignment here - I'm talking about the calibration between the SS camera and OTA. 
      This is what happens - I will do a SS Auto Alignment and the goto will be out by some margin IE. way outside of a 25mm eyepiece. So, I then calibrate the SS camera to the OTA, re-align, and everything is working perfectly. The goto is more or less in the middle of a 12mm eyepiece. Next time I reboot the mount, I do my SS Auto alignment and the goto is way off again  and I have re calibrate the SS camera to the OTA. Once I do that, everything works fine again. And so the cycle continues.  
      Have you experienced this problem yourself or do you have an idea of what may be happening? Before you offer your suggestions, please read this list as what I have done to try and solve this issue:
      1. The tripod and OTA are absolutely level before booting up the mount. 
      2. Once I have booted up the mount, I enter time and my location, using GPS co-ordinates. I am extremely precise about this and am entering the correct time (and daylight saving as needed) to within 2 seconds. The GPS co-ordinates of my location as absolutely spot on as well - they are the same co-ordinates I use for all my telescopes and they are working perfectly. So this is defs not a time, date or location issue. 
      3. The SS camera is mounted perfectly It does not move at all. I have the calibration problem even after rebooting without moving the telescope's position at all. 
      4. I have even tried a new SS camera and handset. Exactly the same issue persists. 
      5. The handcontroller, mount and camera have all the latest updates. 
      6. The battery is working fine and holding it's charge perfectly.  
      As I mentioned earlier, once the SS camera is re calibrated, everything works fine and the goto is accurate. The problem only arises after rebooting the mount. 
      Any ideas, suggestions or sharing of similar experiences gladly welcomed, thank you. 

      Siouxsie 
    • By AstroRookie
      Hello,
      when applying the flats taken in my last session (to find out what is causing the strange diffraction spikes) with Siril, the final stacked result still shows the vignetting and the dust spots. I also did the whole preprocessing with Nebulosity, same result.
      I took the flats as follows:
      same iso as my subs camera and focus not touched I use a homemade flatbox combined with the a white t-shirt with Ekos took test shots till the histogram was half-way to the left checked all my flats, they all show vignetting and the same dust spots as in my subs I tried using them with and without using a bias frame, same result, the final result looks as if no flats were used.
      Anybody any idea what is going on? An other question I have, will the vignetting and dust spots also show in the master flat (flats stacked)?
      Thanks for your help,
      AstroRookie
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.