Is Drizzle worth doing? Also De-convolution on NB data?

[jlodge]

Dithered NB data taken with a Takahashi FSQ-106ED and an ZWO ASI1600MM-Pro (1.48"/pixel), is it worth using drizzle? The reason that I ask is that MURE does not work with drizzled data and I like the results that MURE gives.

What are people's thoughts on the benefit of De-convolution of NB data?

[jkmorse]

I would definitely take a look at a side by side of using drizzle and not.  It really depends on how good your stars are and your seeing.  It seems that you are well sampled already so you may not see much improvement, but you should check.  I know that with my system, where my resolution is sub 1 arcsec, it makes no sense to use drizzle.

As to deconvolution, it depends on what you intend to use as your luminance frame.  If you are using your Ha master or create a monochrome synlum to combine with your color data, it always helps to add a bit of extra resolution and tightens up the stars.

Best,

Jim

[jlodge]

Thank you very much Jim.

[Terry Danks]

I'm very new to drizzle. That said, I do a lot of imaging with an FSQ106EDXIII and the 0.73 QE reducer on a FF STL11002 camera. That gives me a plate scale of 4.86 a-s/px. Drizzle definitely improves the smaller stars, making them round rather than square. You might not notice it at typical web scales but pixel-peeping shows a real improvement.