Year of the Comet
Comet C/2011 L4 (PANSTARRS)

PANSTARRS information

Comet C/2012 S1 (ISON)

ISON information

Tony Hallas' Cosmic Imaging
E-mail Article to a FriendPrint ArticleBookmark and Share

Tony Hallas' Cosmic Imaging: Getting clean images

September 2010: High-quality astroimaging involves using correct post-processing techniques.
By Tony Hallas Published: July 26, 2010
Tony Hallas
By now, the charge-coupled device (CCD) camera is well-known to many of Astronomy's readers who take celestial images. But there are still holdouts who prefer the DSLR for its low cost and ease of use. Also, some new imagers aren't sure if a CCD camera is the right choice. To help you understand what's involved if you choose a CCD camera, and to lay the groundwork for future columns that deal with processing CCD data into stunning images, I dedicate this column to CCD basics.

Make no mistake: A CCD camera, even the smallest one, can run circles around a DSLR when it comes to faint detail. For this reason, and because a CCD camera has the ability to take data through discrete filters with ease, the CCD camera is my choice for astrophotography. There are a few things you should know, however, about the common properties of these cameras.

First, CCD chips perform linearly. You can plot the data collection as a straight line. CCD cameras are not perfect, however. As an exposure progresses, current builds up in the chip's individual pixels. This excess — called "dark current" — shows up as bright dots on an otherwise black background. So even in total darkness, a CCD chip produces an image.
September 2010 cosmic rays
Cosmic rays strike CCD chips during exposures, and most chips are sensitive enough to record the hit as optical “noise” (circled). Most astroimaging software offers an algorithm that will let you easily remove all traces of cosmic-ray hits.
Photo by Tony Hallas
All is not lost, however, because you can re-create dark current and subtract it from the data you collected. Imagers refer to this process as "dark subtraction" because you record a "dark frame" in total darkness (with the CCD chip covered) so you capture only the dark current. Once you do this, what's left is the real data — your image.

CCD cameras are so sensitive that they actually record cosmic-ray hits! These show up as optical "debris" scattered throughout your image. Because this pattern is random, it will be different on each of your frames. (Imagers usually combine a number of exposures called "frames" into a final image.) This randomness allows us to eliminate the cosmic-ray noise by using a software algorithm that compares all the frames. Anything constant to all frames remains, and anything random is rejected. The "median combine" and the "standard deviation sigma combine" are examples of two algorithms imagers use for this purpose.

A third noise is optical. Any dust present on a filter or on the CCD camera's window (if it has one) appears on the image as a donut or a black blob. Your optical system also might create vignetting, which causes the corners of the image to darken. You can fix both of these problems by shooting a "flat field" frame, which consists of an image of a (usually) white surface. Software then divides each pixel of the image by the corresponding amount of light collected on the blank image. When you apply this correction, the shadows largely disappear.
September 2010 dark subtraction
Dark subtraction is a process astroimagers use to remove bright dots resulting from excess current that builds up in the pixels of a CCD chip. To perform a dark subtraction, take an image (called a dark frame) with the CCD camera covered. Then, using software, subtract that image from your original.
Photo by All images: Tony Hallas
So, to summarize, take three steps to achieve clean images with a CCD camera. First, shoot dark frames at the same time and temperature as the data frames. Then apply them to the image to remove dark current. Second, shoot flat field frames to remove optical noise.

Finally, combine several frames of your image together with a median or standard deviation sigma combine algorithm to reject cosmic-ray hits. Note that your dark frames also get hit by cosmic rays, so you'll have to perform a combine on them as well.

Use these techniques and you'll get the most out of the CCD images you capture through your telescope. Next month, I'll talk about combining images and managing the signal-to-noise ratio.

And don't forget to send your best image to Astronomy's 2010 Astroimaging Contest. You have until October 1. For more information, read David J. Eicher's editorial on page 8 of this issue.
Related Issues
User Comments
Be the first to leave your comment below!

Only registered members of Astronomy.com are allowed to comment on this article. Registration is FREE and only takes a couple minutes.

Register Today!
 
5 stars
LUIS FIGUEROA from NEW YORK said:
Good afternoon. I took pictures yesterday using my Celestron CPC 800 Telescope and my Canon T3 of Jupiter and Saturn. What do I have to do to take better and larger pictures? The planets come out real small in the image then I have zoom in after I download the picture. Please feel free to email me at figzsky@gmail.com for tips. Thank you
MARTIN CAMPBELL from UNITED KINGDOM said:
I have to agree with Shawn Nielsen there does appear to be a bias in Tony's features against DSLR cameras. Like Shawn I use modified and unmodified DSLR cameras for astro imaging and I am convinced that they seriously challenge CCD devices.
5 stars
JOHN M REILLY SR from CALIFORNIA said:
I have been admiring Tony& Daphne's work for over 20+yrs(since film days). and it just keeps getting better! Keep up the great work. JMR
4 stars
ISMAEL RODRIGUEZ from COLORADO said:
Tony's section in Astronomy magazine is one of my favorites. Although I mostly use a DSLR (non-modified) camera and have achieved great results, I understand Tony's argument favoring modern CCDs. DSLR's are definitelly easier to use, if you know what you are doing, but CCD's give you the extra high definition for professional results.
4 stars
JERRY BARDECKER from NEVADA said:
I have to say I agree with Shawn Neilsen on the issue of DSLR astro-imagers. There seems to be a strong bias among many so-called experts. DSLR AP can be very satisfying for the imager. Just look at some of the work by Jerry Lodriguss and others, using DSLRs. Digital AP is an art, that creates artful images of great wonder, whether taken with expensive CCD equipment or modestly priced modified DSLRs.

I would also agree that DSLR AP is NOT easy. We still have to have properly aligned our imaging equipment, have knowledge of, the night sky, auto-guiding techniques, computer systems, software acquisition and post processing, etc. I have spent many months learning the many aspects of this hobby and still have much to learn.

Tony’s articles have been very helpful and I hope they continue. But I don’t think this is the place to disparage an area of AP that is clearly growing and is producing many fine images and imagers.

2 stars
SHAWN NIELSEN said:
Why is that there is always a slant that DSLR astrophotography is somehow lesser than CCD astrophotography? This is the second time I've gotten this impression from reading a Tony Hallas article.

I know of many excellent astrophotographers that use DLSR and achieve excellent results. In fact, I myself use a modified Canon 350XT and average equipment (Celestron/Skywatcher) to take my images and have not only won awards for these images, had them published but even won an annual cross Canada 9th annual image contest with Skynews magazine for best DSLR image. I have buddies who literally have $10,000 or more worth of telescope, mount and CCD cameras (QSI, SBIG etc) and their images are not as good as what I have achieved with a modified DSLR.

I should also point out that many DSLR cameras are more expensive than some CCD cameras, not including having it modified.

I would also go against the notion suggested in this article that DSLR imaging is "easy". In fact its the opposite considering you have no cooling. Getting everything just right and gathering everything needed for post-processing (darks) has to be done much more accurately and in-the-field, compared to using a CCD which really you can do darks later in the comfort of your home while watching TV because you can just set the temperature and shoot these dark frames.

Some good information Tony has but I'd like to see this slant against DSLR embraced differently even if it is only hinted upon in undertones of the articles.

Cheers.

5 stars
MS B MERRITT from ARIZONA said:
Concise and well-written. I'm just getting starting in astrophotography and already this article alone has provided information I was not aware of. I look forward to reading all of Tony's articles since I have significant equipment and locale to (potentially:) make great astrophotographs. I just need training.

Tony, keep up the good work.
5 stars
SCOTT COLLETT said:
you should have hired this guy along time ago, he's amazing. Keep up the good work Tony
5 stars
PETER AAROE-HANSEN said:
The best - can't wait to read more!
5 stars
KARL AUFDERHEIDE from TEXAS said:
All these articles have been very informative and useful, with good theoretical and practical information.

Could you create a collection of these columns available for a single download instead of the current hunt and load?
SEARCH SITE
Subscriber Only Access
Subscriber Only Content
Look for this icon. This denotes premium subscriber content. Learn more »
Become a Member of Astronomy.com
Register today for access to more valuable resource information.
Interact in our forums, comment on articles, receive our newsletter and much more!
Not a member?
Subscriber and Member Login
Password
Remember me