View Single Post
  #25  
Old 18-05-2016, 04:14 PM
codemonkey's Avatar
codemonkey (Lee)
Registered User

codemonkey is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Kilcoy, QLD
Posts: 1,765
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shiraz View Post
Hi Lee. No I wanted to get around all of the complications of stacking by taking just the raw subs and averaging the FWHM for the handful of interleaved subs used at each sub length (from 4 subs total at 300sec up to 200 subs at 1 sec (from memory - don't have the data on this PC) . Nothing has been stacked.
Ah, ok, thanks for the clarification, Ray. You mentioned "final stack" so I assumed they had been integrated.

There's a very clear trend in the charts that you provided, and the results are intuitive. That's what I'd hoped I was seeing in the initial charts.

From here, I think the next step is to evaluate the net gains of having more, sharper subs vs fewer less sharp subs.

Are the rejection algorithms good enough to provide a tangible benefit in the integrations? If you integrate 2x5s less sharp subs with 10x1s sharper subs, is the latter integration still sharper?

It might be interesting to do a drizzle integration as well, with a scale of 1, as this would avoid the sharpening effects of (some of?) the interpolation algorithms used in registration.
Reply With Quote