Re: Long exposure vs. multiple exposure
From: Chris L Peterson (clp_at_alumni.caltech.edu)
Date: 08/19/04
- Next message: Chris L Peterson: "Re: Cleaning Solvents"
- Previous message: Drew: "Re: How can globs be so old?"
- In reply to: Steve Maddison: "Long exposure vs. multiple exposure"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 01:13:33 GMT
On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 02:11:26 +0200, Steve Maddison <steve@cosam.org> wrote:
>Hi all,
>
>I bought a Canon PowerShot S45 digital camera a year or two ago before I
>got into astronomy. It's a decent camera, I was thinking of rigging it
>up to try my hand at astrophotography.
>
>I've looked through the docs and experimented with long exposures, but
>this model only goes up to a maximum of 15 seconds. I was initially a
>little disappointed, but then got thinking about using multiple
>exposures of 15 seconds (or less) and stacking the images.
>
>Maybe my logic has taken a wrong turn somewhere but, given the accuracy
>of your average, run-of-the-mill mount, wouldn't the use of several
>images allow some manual correction of tracking errors? Surely there is
>some major advantage of a single, longer exposure that I've so far
>overlooked? (Apart from the obvious elimination of the stacking process
>itself.)
There are different sources of noise in digital images. Dark current noise
increases with time, and is the same for one image or a stack of equal exposure.
Readout noise occurs with every image however, and for short exposures is a
significant part of the total noise. The advantage of long exposures is that the
readout noise becomes insignificant.
As you note, there is an advantage to using shorter exposures in order to
minimize tracking problems. Most serious imagers find a compromise position,
using subexposure times ranging from between 5 and 30 minutes, and then stacking
as many as required, usually for total exposures of one to several hours.
With a digital camera, your options are much more limited. In most cases, you
will simply collect a great many images at the longest possible exposure. Noise
will be large compared to what you would have with a cooled, long exposure
camera, but that doesn't mean you can't get quite nice results.
_________________________________________________
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com
- Next message: Chris L Peterson: "Re: Cleaning Solvents"
- Previous message: Drew: "Re: How can globs be so old?"
- In reply to: Steve Maddison: "Long exposure vs. multiple exposure"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
