Author Topic: Poor Image Integration  (Read 10650 times)

Offline Andres.Pozo

  • PTeam Member
  • PixInsight Padawan
  • ****
  • Posts: 927
Re: Poor Image Integration
« Reply #15 on: 2011 June 03 01:11:30 »
I then calibrated my lights with only the Master Flat subtracted, without Dark or Bias subtraction.
I think that you can't apply the MasterFlat without having applied before at least a Bias. Also the MasterFlat itself must be Bias/Dark calibrated. The calibration is a sequence where its steps are not independent and the can not be applied isolated.

Offline georg.viehoever

  • PTeam Member
  • PixInsight Jedi Master
  • ******
  • Posts: 2132
Re: Poor Image Integration
« Reply #16 on: 2011 June 03 03:58:59 »
I then calibrated my lights with only the Master Flat subtracted, without Dark or Bias subtraction.
I think that you can't apply the MasterFlat without having applied before at least a Bias. Also the MasterFlat itself must be Bias/Dark calibrated. The calibration is a sequence where its steps are not independent and the can not be applied isolated.

Thats correct. Basically, you should be doing (lights-bias)/(flats-bias), and this is different from lights/flats. Simple math.... And if there is dark current, this should be considered as well.

Georg
Georg (6 inch Newton, unmodified Canon EOS40D+80D, unguided EQ5 mount)

Offline Philip de Louraille

  • PixInsight Addict
  • ***
  • Posts: 289
Re: Poor Image Integration
« Reply #17 on: 2011 June 03 05:36:27 »
I used auto background extractor on the first jpg (!) and removed quite a lot of the gradient. I would think it would do a much better job from the 12- or 16-bit image still in linear mode.
Philip de Louraille

Offline Doug

  • Newcomer
  • Posts: 11
Re: Poor Image Integration
« Reply #18 on: 2011 June 05 04:09:20 »
Thanks for all your comments.
I'll try out more tests and see where I get to.
Doug Ives