If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
dynamic range and thermal noise
dear ng, Iīm still into analog photography but have a keen interest in the digital technique. As far as I understand it, the dynamic range of an imaging sensor/camera combo is defined as the maximum signal divided by the noise which is produced in the various stages. Does thermal noise still play a vital role in this calculation (as far as longtime exposures are concerned) or is it so successfully erased by the noise reduction techniques that it doesnīt have to be be taken into account in calculating dynamic range? Best regards for your input! Marc Wossner |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
dynamic range and thermal noise
On 7 Okt., 15:38, Scott W wrote:
Marc Wossner wrote: dear ng, Iīm still into analog photography but have a keen interest in the digital technique. As far as I understand it, the dynamic range of an imaging sensor/camera combo is defined as the maximum signal divided by the noise which is produced in the various stages. Does thermal noise still play a vital role in this calculation (as far as longtime exposures are concerned) or is it so successfully erased by the noise reduction techniques that it doesnīt have to be be taken into account in calculating dynamic range? Best regards for your input! Marc Wossner I believe you are really talking about dark current, which is very temperature depended, not thermal noise. If so then yes for long exposures dark current can become an issue. Scott Well I thought dark current translates into thermal noise so that both are indeed the same. Isnīt that correct? Marc |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
dynamic range and thermal noise
Marc Wossner wrote:
On 7 Okt., 15:38, Scott W wrote: Marc Wossner wrote: dear ng, Iīm still into analog photography but have a keen interest in the digital technique. As far as I understand it, the dynamic range of an imaging sensor/camera combo is defined as the maximum signal divided by the noise which is produced in the various stages. Does thermal noise still play a vital role in this calculation (as far as longtime exposures are concerned) or is it so successfully erased by the noise reduction techniques that it doesnīt have to be be taken into account in calculating dynamic range? Best regards for your input! Marc Wossner I believe you are really talking about dark current, which is very temperature depended, not thermal noise. If so then yes for long exposures dark current can become an issue. Scott Well I thought dark current translates into thermal noise so that both are indeed the same. Isnīt that correct? Marc Yes, the square root of the dark current is the thermal noise. Dark current is generally low in modern cameras, a fraction of an electron per second, so it takes a while for it to become a factor. It is higher with higher temperatures, like 100F it could be several/second. The simple solution is take multiple short exposures and add them together. Effectively, with this technique, dark current is not an issue. Roger |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
dynamic range and thermal noise
Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark) wrote:
snip Yes, the square root of the dark current is the thermal noise. Dark current is generally low in modern cameras, a fraction of an electron per second, so it takes a while for it to become a factor. It is higher with higher temperatures, like 100F it could be several/second. The simple solution is take multiple short exposures and add them together. Effectively, with this technique, dark current is not an issue. Roger The first part is correct. The second isn't. Combining several exposures reduces the noise according to the square root of the number of images. Combining four photos lowers the noise only by a factor of 2. To reduce noise by a factor of 4, you would have to combine 16 images. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
dynamic range and thermal noise
On Oct 7, 7:26 am, Marc Wossner wrote:
dear ng, Iīm still into analog photography but have a keen interest in the digital technique. As far as I understand it, the dynamic range of an imaging sensor/camera combo is defined as the maximum signal divided by the noise which is produced in the various stages. Does thermal noise still play a vital role in this calculation (as far as longtime exposures are concerned) or is it so successfully erased by the noise reduction techniques that it doesnīt have to be be taken into account in calculating dynamic range? Best regards for your input! Marc Wossner Correct. There are several types of noise, including quantization noise (from the A/D uncertainty), dark noise, photon noise, amplifier noise, - that takes care of the common ones. Which one is the limiting noise is harder to determine. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
dynamic range and thermal noise
On Oct 7, 8:48 am, Marc Wossner wrote:
On 7 Okt., 15:38, Scott W wrote: Marc Wossner wrote: dear ng, Iīm still into analog photography but have a keen interest in the digital technique. As far as I understand it, the dynamic range of an imaging sensor/camera combo is defined as the maximum signal divided by the noise which is produced in the various stages. Does thermal noise still play a vital role in this calculation (as far as longtime exposures are concerned) or is it so successfully erased by the noise reduction techniques that it doesnīt have to be be taken into account in calculating dynamic range? Best regards for your input! Marc Wossner I believe you are really talking about dark current, which is very temperature depended, not thermal noise. If so then yes for long exposures dark current can become an issue. Scott Well I thought dark current translates into thermal noise so that both are indeed the same. Isnīt that correct? Marc Not quite. Usually when we talk about dark current we mean the current in the photodetector. But any electronic element can have thermal noise in it. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
dynamic range and thermal noise
Scott W wrote:
Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark) wrote: Marc Wossner wrote: On 7 Okt., 15:38, Scott W wrote: Marc Wossner wrote: dear ng, Iīm still into analog photography but have a keen interest in the digital technique. As far as I understand it, the dynamic range of an imaging sensor/camera combo is defined as the maximum signal divided by the noise which is produced in the various stages. Does thermal noise still play a vital role in this calculation (as far as longtime exposures are concerned) or is it so successfully erased by the noise reduction techniques that it doesnīt have to be be taken into account in calculating dynamic range? Best regards for your input! Marc Wossner I believe you are really talking about dark current, which is very temperature depended, not thermal noise. If so then yes for long exposures dark current can become an issue. Scott Well I thought dark current translates into thermal noise so that both are indeed the same. Isnīt that correct? Marc Yes, the square root of the dark current is the thermal noise. Dark current is generally low in modern cameras, a fraction of an electron per second, so it takes a while for it to become a factor. It is higher with higher temperatures, like 100F it could be several/second. The simple solution is take multiple short exposures and add them together. Effectively, with this technique, dark current is not an issue. Roger You might want to look at this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_noise I have never heard anyone refer to dark current as thermal noise. But forget that for the moment, in your solution of taking multiple short exposures you will still end up with the same ratio of dark current to signal current. What you can avoid is saturation due to dark current, but you will get the same noise from the dark current regardless of whether you break the one long exposure into a number of smaller ones or not. A reference directly discussing electronic sensors: http://learn.hamamatsu.com/articles/ccdsnr.html Scroll down to dark current: "Dark noise arises from statistical variation in the number of electrons thermally generated within the silicon structure of the CCD, which is independent of photon-induced signal, but highly dependent on device temperature. The generation rate of thermal electrons at a given CCD temperature is referred to as dark current. In similarity to photon noise, dark noise follows a Poisson relationship to dark current, and is equivalent to the square-root of the number of thermal electrons generated within the time. Cooling the CCD reduces the dark current dramatically, and in practice, high-performance cameras are usually cooled to a temperature at which dark current is negligible over a typical exposure interval." And reduction of dynamic range is esxactly why to take many short exposures and add them For example, if you had a gain of 1 on your ADC (1 electron = 1 DN or ADU), then your 12-bit ADC saturates at about 4000 electrons (including a small bias), so if you had 1 electron/sec dark current, a 1 hour exposure leaves tou with little dynamic range. Twelve 5-minute exposure would maintain most of your dynamic range. That is what I was referring to as not an issue, as the OP was asking about dynamic range. You are correct that the noise from dark current is always a factor, and the only way to reduce it is to work at colder temperatures (e.g. winter nights are better for night sly imaging than summer nights). Roger |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
dynamic range and thermal noise
Marvin wrote:
Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark) wrote: snip Yes, the square root of the dark current is the thermal noise. Dark current is generally low in modern cameras, a fraction of an electron per second, so it takes a while for it to become a factor. It is higher with higher temperatures, like 100F it could be several/second. The simple solution is take multiple short exposures and add them together. Effectively, with this technique, dark current is not an issue. Roger The first part is correct. The second isn't. Combining several exposures reduces the noise according to the square root of the number of images. Combining four photos lowers the noise only by a factor of 2. To reduce noise by a factor of 4, you would have to combine 16 images. It is correct. Adding multiple shorter exposures maintains dynamic range, which is what the OP asked. What you say is correct also, but is addressing a different question. I should have added "regarding dynamic range" at the end of my sentence. More info on low light photography: http://www.clarkvision.com/photoinfo...ht.photography Roger |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
dynamic range and thermal noise
On Sun, 07 Oct 2007 19:13:58 -0600, "Roger N. Clark (change username to
rnclark)" wrote: Scott W wrote: Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark) wrote: Marc Wossner wrote: On 7 Okt., 15:38, Scott W wrote: Marc Wossner wrote: dear ng, Iīm still into analog photography but have a keen interest in the digital technique. As far as I understand it, the dynamic range of an imaging sensor/camera combo is defined as the maximum signal divided by the noise which is produced in the various stages. Does thermal noise still play a vital role in this calculation (as far as longtime exposures are concerned) or is it so successfully erased by the noise reduction techniques that it doesnīt have to be be taken into account in calculating dynamic range? Best regards for your input! Marc Wossner I believe you are really talking about dark current, which is very temperature depended, not thermal noise. If so then yes for long exposures dark current can become an issue. Scott Well I thought dark current translates into thermal noise so that both are indeed the same. Isnīt that correct? Marc Yes, the square root of the dark current is the thermal noise. Dark current is generally low in modern cameras, a fraction of an electron per second, so it takes a while for it to become a factor. It is higher with higher temperatures, like 100F it could be several/second. The simple solution is take multiple short exposures and add them together. Effectively, with this technique, dark current is not an issue. Roger You might want to look at this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_noise I have never heard anyone refer to dark current as thermal noise. But forget that for the moment, in your solution of taking multiple short exposures you will still end up with the same ratio of dark current to signal current. What you can avoid is saturation due to dark current, but you will get the same noise from the dark current regardless of whether you break the one long exposure into a number of smaller ones or not. A reference directly discussing electronic sensors: http://learn.hamamatsu.com/articles/ccdsnr.html Scroll down to dark current: "Dark noise arises from statistical variation in the number of electrons thermally generated within the silicon structure of the CCD, which is independent of photon-induced signal, but highly dependent on device temperature. The generation rate of thermal electrons at a given CCD temperature is referred to as dark current. In similarity to photon noise, dark noise follows a Poisson relationship to dark current, and is equivalent to the square-root of the number of thermal electrons generated within the time. Cooling the CCD reduces the dark current dramatically, and in practice, high-performance cameras are usually cooled to a temperature at which dark current is negligible over a typical exposure interval." And reduction of dynamic range is esxactly why to take many short exposures and add them For example, if you had a gain of 1 on your ADC (1 electron = 1 DN or ADU), then your 12-bit ADC saturates at about 4000 electrons (including a small bias), so if you had 1 electron/sec dark current, a 1 hour exposure leaves tou with little dynamic range. Twelve 5-minute exposure would maintain most of your dynamic range. That is what I was referring to as not an issue, as the OP was asking about dynamic range. You are correct that the noise from dark current is always a factor, and the only way to reduce it is to work at colder temperatures (e.g. winter nights are better for night sly imaging than summer nights). Roger Displaying the pitfalls of a slightly-above-average I.Q. without logic and common sense. Smarter people may be able to build bigger bridges, but they just as easily dig deeper ditches for themselves, without even realizing it. With no way out than one day relying on someone smarter and wiser than them to save them from themselves. They rarely allow that, they're too smart for that. :-) |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
dynamic range and thermal noise
On 7 Okt., 16:29, "Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark)"
wrote: Yes, the square root of the dark current is the thermal noise. Dark current is generally low in modern cameras, a fraction of an electron per second, so it takes a while for it to become a factor. It is higher with higher temperatures, like 100F it could be several/second. Thanks for the clarification! The simple solution is take multiple short exposures and add them together. Effectively, with this technique, dark current is not an issue. OK, but except those measures after taking the picture is there something manufacturers build into their cameras to reduce thermal noise? Are there digital slrs that use active cooling or dark frame subtraction as a standard? Marc |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
PhotoTechniques -- dynamic range | jack | In The Darkroom | 3 | December 9th 06 03:30 PM |
high dynamic range in P&S ?? | minnesotti | Digital Photography | 4 | October 27th 06 03:03 AM |
dynamic range and A/D conversion | Johannes | Digital Photography | 18 | September 24th 06 08:25 PM |
dynamic range | Paul Furman | Digital SLR Cameras | 36 | February 22nd 06 04:05 AM |
Are we ignored regarding dynamic range? | ThomasH | Digital Photography | 43 | January 1st 05 11:32 PM |