Wednesday, March 10, 2004

Imaging bright objects

How I take images depends on the object in question. I usually use a webcam for bright objects inside our solar system, and a sensitive cooled camera for everything else.

The reason is that even though the webcam is much less sensitive than my main camera and has a much smaller dynamic range (brightness levels), it can take up to 25 frames a second, whereas the main camera is limited to one 0.1 second frame each second. To minimize the effects of seeing (air turbulence), I can therefore use the technique of "lucky imaging" with the webcam. This is a technique with exposure times short enough so that the changes in the atmosphere during the exposure are minimal. From these images (a movie really), I select the frames least affected by the atmosphere and combine them into a single image by shifting and adding the short exposures. This yields a much higher resolution than would be possible with a single, longer exposure and allows me to reach the diffraction limit of my telescope, about 0.5 arc seconds (one arc second is the apparent size of a dime about 3.7 kilometers away). By adding hundreds of individual frames like this, the effective dynamic range of the webcam increases, reducing the effects of noise, and I can apply advanced image processing techniques to further increase the resolution of the final image.

Because the exposures are short, I can also use the simpler ALT-AZ setup for the telescope, which is less sensitive to disturbances and vibrations by the wind. During the exposures, the telescope is passively tracking the object to counter the effects of the rotation of the Earth. The Earth's rotation moves objects with a speed of up to 15 arc seconds each second out of view or, with the image scale generally used for these images, between 30-60 pixels each second. The telescope mount can counter the effects of this rotation, but with my telescope, the remaining tracking errors have an eight minute periodic component of 21 arc seconds in them. With the built-in software of the telescope mount I reduced that to an eight minute periodic error of 7 arc seconds peak to peak (in polar mode; I never measured it in ALT-AZ mode but it sure is much higher).

But, because the individual exposures are very short, this remaining periodic tracking error in an 8 minute time period does not lead to image smearing.


Another benefit of the webcam for these kinds of objects is that, unlike my main camera, it is not a monochrome but a color camera. The 640x480 pixel CCD contains a Bayer filter (50% of the pixels have a green filter, 25% have a red filter and 25% have a blue filter). Although this means that each RGB pixel has at least two interpolated color components, it does have the benefit that the colors are shot at the same time. The only post processing required is relative shifting of the color channels, as the Earth's atmosphere refracts light at a slightly different angle for each color, which amounts up to several pixels on the image scale used.

The maximum number of frames that can be combined using this method is limited to a few thousand. Only a certain percentage, like 10%, of the frames can be used to maximize the resolution of the result. My wish to use an ALT-AZ setup for these kind of images also limits the total exposure time because of the effects of field-rotation in this mode. In addition, the imaged objects themselves rotate too, which leads to smearing if the movies are longer than about 10 minutes.

Tuesday, March 9, 2004

Saturn



Saturn on March 8, 2004.

Jupiter


Planet Jupiter floating in space on March 8, 2004. A combination of 662 frames taken with a ToUCam Pro webcam through the 254mm SCT. A total exposure time of 44 seconds.

Please note how this exposure is expressed in seconds, while most others of this blog are expressed in minutes or even hours. Jupiter's apparent brightness is extremely high compared to objects outside our solar system. In fact, only the Sun, Moon, Venus and Mars can reach a higher apparent brightness.

I clearly improved my technique compared to my first attempt of this planet with this telescope.

Sunday, March 7, 2004

Eye Opener II

On several occasions when using the SCT visually, I noticed a significant glare around bright objects (e.g. planets). This is caused by internal reflections in the optical system. I also ran into this problem during imaging several time. For example the January 21 raw frames of M109 are completely ruined by the reflections of the light of a nearby star.
I found that the standard visual back of the SCT is a major cause of this. Flocking it is however not an option as this increases vignetting. To test this theory, I took some flats on December 26, 2003. Indeed, with the standard visual back my replacement f/3.3 focal reducer has an ADU drop of 7% across the field when used with the ST-7XE camera. But, after flocking the inside of this original visual back, this increased to 12%.
I figured that although an Eye Opener II would theoretically not have any benefits with my 1.25 inch eye pieces, nor with my cameras, it may actually lead to a reduction of the reflections. So I bought one, and found that it was actually even more reflective than the original visual back. Indeed, it is slightly worse than the original visual back in regard to the glare.
However, after flocking the inside of the Eye Opener II, it is actually much better than the original visual back. When using the camera with the f/3.3 focal reducer flocking the Eye Opener II doesn't have any negative effects (the 7% ADU drop remains). However, the glare is very significantly reduced when using it visually with bright objects.

So, for my purposes the Eye Opener II isn't beneficial because it reduces vignetting, but it is only because I have more room to add some flocking to suppress the reflections.