Enigma= Master Bais_Dark_Flat files and my DSLR files

[Cleon_Wells]

       If I Calibrate a single Flat.fit sub that was used in the integration process to make the Master Flat.fit file; should this new single Flat_c.fit  file have any signal level above the set output pedestal level in the CR2 to fit conversion?
Could I expect similar results if I Calibrated a single Bias or Dark .fit sub?
I use a Canon T1i/Hap mod on a 10” RC.
Cleon

[Cleon_Wells]

I calibrated the DSLR Bias, Dark and the Flat fit bayer files, all three Master fit files had Calibrate checked. I then Debayered all the _c files, DeBayer Bias_c file has a signal level between 0.0002 and 0.0005 on all pixels, the Debayer Dark_c file  has all pixels set to 0.000, the Debayer Flat_c file has all pixels set to R=0.0101-G=0.0159, B=0.0149 so there's no image and note one of the hot pixels @ 2522x1573= R=0.0101, G=0.000, and B=0.0149. I unchecked the Master Flat Calibrate box and Calibrated the Flat again, the Debayered uncalibrated Flat looks like a flat with dust donuts and has R=0.0100, G=0.0152, B=0.0153, the hot pixel @ 2522x1573 has been moved to 2524x1573 and has R=0.0102, G=0.0414, and B=0.0116.
Cleon

[georg.viehoever]

Cleon,

       If I Calibrate a single Flat.fit sub that was used in the integration process to make the Master Flat.fit file; should this new single Flat_c.fit  file have any signal level above the set output pedestal level in the CR2 to fit conversion?

This is an interesting test. I would expect the calibrated single flat to have only a random noise signal (thermal+shot noise) with poisson distribution, no large scale gradients or patterns. You may be able to verify a poisson distribution of values by looking at the HistogramTransform GUI.

Georg

[Cleon_Wells]

Georg, also when I calibrate the image subs, the dust donuts are removed if I have the Flat Cal box check, but the hot pixels are not removed. If I uncheck the Flat Cal box and Calibrate the image subs the hot pixels are removed but the dust donuts are not, this is similar to just using the Dark only. I am definitely chasing my tail here.
Cleon

[georg.viehoever]

Hi Cleon,

Georg, also when I calibrate the image subs, the dust donuts are removed if I have the Flat Cal box check, but the hot pixels are not removed. ...

I am not sure if hot pixels can be removed by the calibration process. In my case, they usually disappear when I integrate the registered lights, because in this case the hot pixels will not always be on the same location due to my less than perfect tracking (I have no autoguider), and the outlier rejection methods of ImageIntegration remove them.

Recently I have integrated a couple of pictures close to Polaris, and in this case hotpixels are at the same location for a number of frames. As a consequence, I see them in the integrated version, nicely forming arcs around Polaris    I am now experimenting with the DefectMap process to get rid of them. Another option is to use the method employed by DSS http://deepskystacker.free.fr/english/technical.htm#hotpixelsremoval .

 Georg

[Cleon_Wells]

Georg, _c
Thanks for the link on calibration. Before Pix I only used CS3 for processing, I would remove  the hot pixels  from each sub with a Dark difference layer and then align each sub_c  layer comparing  each sub_c  against a reference sub layer by switching each sub_c layer from screen to difference. I have a lot to learn when it comes to image processing.
Cleon

[Cleon_Wells]

I've been working with Calibration and stacking of 17-90seo_iso800 subs of M78 and can't figure out how to use my CR2 image files with the .fit Cal files, the CR2_c image files have no image data.

Also  I notice some structure change in my M78 image compared to images I see on the web, see attachment; could this be from the DSLR subs?

Also it's unfortunate that Randall had so much trouble with the Pix basics because he had the wrong BatchFormatConversion Version..... I had a similar problem and was able to have Vicent look over my shoulder at the ADLER workshop and point out the version problem.

Cleon

[georg.viehoever]

I also don't see the structure on Google Sky, e.g. http://www.google.de/sky/#latitude=-0.09613032599286975&longitude=-93.42979431152344&zoom=11&Spitzer=0.00&ChandraXO=0.00&Galex=0.00&IRAS=0.00&WMAP=0.00&Cassini=0.00&slide=1&mI=-1&oI=-1

But it appears to be here, McNeil's Nebula: http://www.oneilladvertising.com/Resources/M78rev5.jpg

Anyway, I think it is unlikely to come from calibration. Could be a reflection, or its really McNeil's...

Georg

[Cleon_Wells]

Georg, yes it is McNeil's Neb, it's interesting that the other M78 web images I saw only faintly show some structure in this area of M78.
Thanks for the info.
Cleon

[georg.viehoever]

Georg, yes it is McNeil's Neb, it's interesting that the other M78 web images I saw only faintly show some structure in this area of M78.
Thanks for the info.
Cleon

Well, you are only 6 years too late for the discovery of this interesting object.   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McNeil's_Nebula

Georg

[Cleon_Wells]

Georg, oh well, maybe I can still discover how to Calibrate CR2 14bit files with B_D_F .fit files. LOL
Cleon

[zerro1]

I've just begun this PixInsight journey, and recently succeeded with calibrating my modified Canon 1000D cr2 files, with the .fit master farmes.  One thing I discovered along the way; If by chance your system or PixInsight locks up, and then you get out and restart... The settings for DSLR in format explorer reset to default. This will cause you many headaches if you were not aware of this little tid bit. I've experienced the same issue that you describe "no data in the RAW files", and I believe it was caused by this.

[Cleon_Wells]

Zerro1, Let me frist correct my statement (Also it's unfortunate that Randall had so much trouble with the Pix basics because he had the wrong BatchFormatConversion Version..... I had a similar problem and was able to have Vicent look over my shoulder at the ADLER workshop and point out the version problem.)  I meant to say "the wrong BatchDebayer Version..."
Now lets go back into the ImageCalibration woods , so to speak. I also have just begun the Pix journey and can't get the camera CR2 files to calibrate. My process starts by BatchFormatConversion of my Bias, Darks and Flat CR2 files to .fit with the DSLR_Raw preference set with only two boxes checked, "create Raw Bayer image()"  and "No black point correction". Then I use Imageintegration on the B, D, F .fit files to create my master Cal files. Then I add my CR2 camera files into the ImageCalibration Target Frame list and cal, this does not work; what am I doing wrong?
Cleon

[zerro1]

are you calibrating the flat files with the master bias and master dark before you integrate for the master flat?

also do take note that when integrating the calibrated flat's into the master flat, the settings are different for the flat integration than the settings for the dark and bias frame integration

[Cleon_Wells]

Zerro1, I've tried Cal_ing the flat subs with both B and D Masters and also just B with no luck. I used Vicent's setting to integrate the Master Flat. I tried Cal_ing the CR2 files using the Master Bias only I tried changing  the BatchFormatConvert Raw Format preference and made new Master Bias files made with bias subs that where BatchFormatConverted with the Brightness set to 1.0 ( I normally use a Brightness setting of 4.0 for my 14bit CR2 files), I tried the Raw Bayer CFA conversion settings, still no luck. I'm definitely lost in the  CR2 file Calibration woods.
Cleon