View Single Post
  #41  
Old 25-11-2009, 07:30 PM
jase (Jason)
Registered User

jase is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Melbourne, Victoria
Posts: 3,916
Peter, I think you'll agree there are too many variables to base such an assessment on total integrated exposure time alone. Though, doubling the integration time philosophy you present sounds plausible. If you haven't already done so, take a look at Tony Hallas' presentation. The presentation doesn't read well in an offline state as there are slides with no explanation - you had to have been there...but you'll get an ideal of what he's indicating. Everyone has different concepts and ideas to the quantity of data and I seriously don't believe there is a straight answer. Most would struggle to identify the difference between 8 and 12 or 16 hrs of data, given careful processing and noise reduction.

For the benefit of others, Tony suggests removing black pixels using the colour range and median (filter) tools. This process is a slight deviation from "Tony's Green Pixel Gun" technique. By first removing black pixels, the noise reduction algorithm doesn't need to work as hard. Logical and effective.
Reply With Quote