Larry,
Pixel size is inversely proportional to
sensitivity. If you kept the image scale the
same, the pixel size would be very small in order
to obtain a 50MB image. The
S/N (signal/noise ratio) would be terrible.
Remember these are very dim objects
so the general principles of daylight photography
do not apply.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2002 4:19
PM
Subject: Re: [APML] CCD/Film
Roland
If one image file size was 3MB and another
image file size was 50MB do you not agree that there is no way the 3 MB file
can be enlarged as much as the 50 MB file and still not
pixelate?
Larry McManus
on 4/17/02 1:10 PM, Chris1011@aol.com at Chris1011@aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 4/17/2002 2:48:08 PM Central
Daylight Time, lmcmanus@clearpointadv.com writes:
What you do though is by being able to gather
more information, about the image, on a larger chip allows you to make a
larger guality reproduction without
pixelating.
Sorry, I don't
agree. You cannot gather more information about the image in astronomical
images. The information is limited by the optics and cannot be improved
upon by using more pixels. You'll just have to try it to see what I mean.
Unless you actually do imaging, you might never understand the
limitations. I invite you to shoot M51 with your camera. See what the
results are.
Roland Christen