Jump to content

NLCbanner2024.jpg.2478be509670e60c2d6efd04834b8b47.jpg

a quick pacman and cocoon neb


iwols

Recommended Posts

Nice images from what I suspect is quite a low amount of data.  What I like is that your process has been sympthetic to the data you have and you have worked very well within those contraints.  The Ha colour is spot on, same for the stars.

How much imaging time do you need is a very good question and a long involved one to answer properly!  Here is a good article by Craig Stark https://www.cloudynights.com/articles/cat/column/fishing-for-photons/signal-to-noise-understanding-it-measuring-it-and-improving-it-part-1-r1895

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Martin regarding imaging time and star colour.  It may be my screen, but it seems to me that both images have a slight green tint???? I also agree that Craig Stark's paper illustrates very well the effect of signal to noise ratio.  In very simple terms, I always assume that this S/N ratio increases roughly according the square of of the image time, i.e. 4x image time gives 2x signal to noise.  I know it is not 100% correct, but it works for me.  So it is a law of diminishing returns.  16 x 300 seconds exposures will be twice as good as 8 x 300 seconds.  But to get twice as good as 16 exposures, I need 32 exposures, and frankly this can sometimes take too much time for me.  I choose the individual exposure time based on the longest time I can get a reasonable image with my sky conditions, and this is around 300 seconds for my colour Baader filters.  Longer exposure times tend to saturate some stars and picks up too much sky background "noise", and shorter exposure times sometimes doesn't appear to do justice to some of the fainter things.  Having said that, there is a good argument that twice as many exposures at half the time give good results. However, I think that other sources of noise from the camera etc become too great.

Confused?  Me too....

Chris

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, MartinB said:

Nice images from what I suspect is quite a low amount of data.  What I like is that your process has been sympthetic to the data you have and you have worked very well within those contraints.  The Ha colour is spot on, same for the stars.

How much imaging time do you need is a very good question and a long involved one to answer properly!  Here is a good article by Craig Stark https://www.cloudynights.com/articles/cat/column/fishing-for-photons/signal-to-noise-understanding-it-measuring-it-and-improving-it-part-1-r1895

Thanks each image has 30 mins of each channel 

Link to comment
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.
×
×
  • 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.