›

Sooooper-lum

Scott Badger
in PixInsight
Hi Adam,

In your M83 series you create a super-lum by integrating the subs of each channel. How does that compare to integrating the channel integrations instead of the individual subs? I assume, if valid, it would be done with no weighting and no rejection, though I'm not sure about normalization....

Thanks,
Scott

Comments

  • BlockHeadBlockHead
    No rejection is correct (and no LN normalization).
    You definitely need to WEIGHT the images! At maximum the RGB channels are only taking in 1/3 of the light! 

    There probably isn't a huge difference between doing the subs and using the masters. By integrating across all subs, there is a potential for greater rejection which could be an improvement on an individual masterlights.

    However, I do think I might have messed up the integration I showed. I think I needed to integrate with the scale plus offset normalization to get the weighting correct. I think the way I did it is weird. Maybe just the masters really is the best way. I need to think. lol

    Do the masters. I know this works. 


    -the Blockhead
  • Scott Badger
    Thanks Adam! Is there a weight option you'd recommend for the masters? I compared masters vs subs one time in the past and ended up choosing the masters integration, but not sure the integration settings were optimal and possibly other factors were involved.

    Cheers,
    Scott
  • BlockHeadBlockHead
    The weighting option probably isn't critical in this case. PSF Signal Weight or PSF SNR are probably both just fine.

    -the Blockhead
  • Scott Badger
    Thanks again Adam!
  • Scott Badger
    FWIW, I tried both ways with my current target, SH2-115, and the all subs integration had a marginally better SNR measurement (Pixinsight, SNR script), but the masters integration had slightly better resolution (fwhm) and 'looked ' better overall, a bit more contrast, so I went with that.

    Cheers,
    Scott
Sign In or Register to comment.