Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.

sgl_imaging_challenge_celestial_motion.thumb.jpg.a9e9349c45f96ed7928eb32f1baf76ed.jpg

Adreneline

Which is the better of these two?

Recommended Posts

Hi Everyone.

I've been playing around with the Batch Processing Script in PI with Lights obtained from my ASI1600. The Master Dark is 120s at gain 139, offset 50, -20 degrees to match the Lights. One of these is calibrated with 0.3s Bias frames and one is calibrated with 1.7s Dark-Flats. I've zoomed-in by equal amounts in the top right corner of the image and then performed a STF AutoStretch and captured the screen.

Is one of these better than the other?

Is there no significant difference between the two images?

Should there be a difference or will it only become really apparent if I reduce the Bias exposure to the minimum possible value?

192607024_Screenshot2019-11-0920_29_57.thumb.png.f9262d2c6d8f6dfacf19029977b8aebb.png

Any advice / help would be appreciated.

Adrian

 

Edited by Adreneline

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Adreneline said:

Should there be a difference or will it only become really apparent if I reduce the Bias exposure to the minimum possible value?

Presuming that difference between these two subs is only the way master flat was prepared (not quite clear to me from your post) - in one case you used proper flat-darks of same exposure (and other parameters) as flats and for other one you used bias instead of flat-darks to create master flat, then only difference that can show will be in flat application. You won't find significant difference in noise levels or star shapes or anything.

One that uses bias can have either over or under correction by flats (not sure which one of the top of my head), but it's not necessarily the case. It will depend on few factors - how much light blockage there is in the first place (either from dust particles or vignetting), and what is the difference in bias mean value vs dark-flat mean value (larger the difference - more chance there will be issue with flat calibration).

It might not even be visible there is issue (even if there is) unless you stack and stretch very hard, so there might be an issue that does not show on normal level of stretch and you can end up with good looking image anyway.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

It might not even be visible there is issue (even if there is) unless you stack and stretch very hard, so there might be an issue that does not show on normal level of stretch and you can end up with good looking image anyway.

Thanks vlaiv for the response. The image on the left is using Bias - the one on the right is using Dark-Flat. I don't believe there is any great difference although on my MBP the Dark-Flat image appears to have a slightly darker background, but it is marginal. I cannot see any great difference in noise.

Adrian

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Adreneline said:

MBP the Dark-Flat image appears to have a slightly darker background

Can you translate that in non PI speak? :D

If you take master bias and master dark-flat and do stats on each, what do you get as mean pixel value?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

what do you get as mean pixel value?

872 vs 866 - not significantly different:

1359678297_Mean-DFBias.thumb.jpg.03c6894f64d23b0b1f39eb406ed4ab65.jpg

Adrian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, yes, as predicted value is different, and in this particular case your calibrated sub will be less noisy if you use bias - because you stacked 200 of them vs only 20 of dark flats :D

Best version would be to use 200 of dark flats.

Just to explain what will happen when you calibrate with using bias only.

Let's suppose that you have some pixel value in the image that received blocked light. It was 20% in shadow and it's original value was 100ADU, but since it was in shadow - sensor actually recorded only 80ADU (20% light block). You want to correct this by use of flat. Let's further suppose that your flat peak was at 75% of histogram - that means around 47872ADU. This value is together with bias and dark current. Shaded part is only 80% of this value.

If you use bias only to calibrate your light, you will create 6ADU difference in your flat (because mean of dark flat is larger for about 6ADU than bias only). We can say that proper value for flat at 100% is 47872 so subtract 872 and you have 47000. You need 80% of that and that will be - 37600. When you "scale" your flat you will get 37600 / 47000 = 0.8.

What happens if you use bias instead of flat dark? You will end up with following values: 47006 and 37605 and "scaled" value of flat will be 37605/47006 = ~0.800005 (very small change in this case).

If you correct your 80ADU in light sub with factor of 0.8, you will get proper value 80 / 0.8 = 100ADU, but if you correct with bias only you will get slightly different value 80 / 0.800005 = ~99.9995ADU. Your signal is very slightly darker than it should be. You ended up with under correction because you used bias instead of flat darks. In this particular case that we did - difference is so tiny that it would not show at all, but it is there because there is difference between master bias and master flat dark in mean value.

Depending on difference between bias and dark flat and how much your signal needs correction (we used 20% but sometimes it can be even larger than that) - under correction will show when you stretch your data enough.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks @vlaiv for your very complete response. I need to try to absorb the detail and significance of this. It seems to me though that providing I don't overstretch the image then any differences will be negligable. I think I might up the number of Dark-Flats and use them.

Many thanks for the time you have taken to help me with this.

Adrian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.