Go Back   IceInSpace > Equipment > Software and Computers
Register FAQ Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
  #1  
Old 30-05-2008, 08:08 AM
Kirkus's Avatar
Kirkus (Kirk)
Beginner-ish

Kirkus is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: California, USA
Posts: 207
A question about Flats

In the article "Digital Imaging - Flats and Darks Explained!" in the Projects and Articles section, relating to Flats, I don't understand this sentence:

Quote:
The main aim is to get a flat field that has an average pixel value of about 30% of the maximum pixel value that your camera is capable of. For a 16-bit camera, this would be approximately 20,000. Most image processing software will give you the average pixel value in an image so this value is generally easily obtained.
I'm not sure what "pixel value" is. Is this speaking about resolution?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 30-05-2008, 08:15 AM
iceman's Avatar
iceman (Mike)
Sir Post a Lot!

iceman is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Gosford, NSW, Australia
Posts: 36,799
No, it means the intensity of the pixel - how "bright" it is.

So when you take a flat, you're aiming for the histogram to spike at about 1/3 of the way along.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 30-05-2008, 09:26 AM
Dennis
Dazzled by the Cosmos.

Dennis is offline
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 11,828
Good question. Each “pixel” on the sensor is a photo-site that has a “well depth”. Think of each photo-site as a bucket and think of incoming photons as droplets of rain.

Each ccd/cmos chip has a specific well depth, how many photons it can register before a bucket (photo-site) fills up and overflows (saturates).

For my ST7E ccd camera, I get saturation or star blooming spikes at around 58,000 photons, so when I take my Flats, I aim for an exposure which gives me a reading of around 15,000 to 20,000 which in my case, is shown by the camera control software, CCDSoft.

From memory, I think that my ST7E is a 16 bit camera so in theory the “bit depth” is 65,536, although it seems my “well depth” is only around 58,000 before the photo site overflows.

Cheers

Dennis

Last edited by Dennis; 30-05-2008 at 09:43 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 30-05-2008, 06:11 PM
Kirkus's Avatar
Kirkus (Kirk)
Beginner-ish

Kirkus is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: California, USA
Posts: 207
Okey dokey. Thanks to you both. Now it makes a little more sense.

Would I adjust the exposure/iso to reach the optimum 30% value? Would changing the value in Photoshop after the fact be an acceptable way to reach that value?
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 30-05-2008, 07:14 PM
iceman's Avatar
iceman (Mike)
Sir Post a Lot!

iceman is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Gosford, NSW, Australia
Posts: 36,799
Use ISO100, and adjust the exposure to get the histogram to the right spot.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 31-05-2008, 04:02 AM
Kirkus's Avatar
Kirkus (Kirk)
Beginner-ish

Kirkus is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: California, USA
Posts: 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by iceman View Post
Use ISO100, and adjust the exposure to get the histogram to the right spot.
Excellent! Thank you, Mike. Thank you, Dennis.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 02-06-2008, 09:39 AM
higginsdj's Avatar
higginsdj
A Lazy Astronomer

higginsdj is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Canberra
Posts: 614
That Flat advice should probably read 'no less than 30%'. I take flats at 50-60% of well depth for my photometry work.

Cheers
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +10. The time is now 07:21 AM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7 | Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement
Bintel
Advertisement
Astrophotography Prize
Advertisement