Git commit 323adaebb6b30b3b11428819a03dd1f5c92f0644 by Yuri Chornoivan.
Committed on 30/11/2023 at 07:16.
Pushed by yurchor into branch 'master'.

Fix minor typos

M  +7    -7    doc/ekos-capture.docbook

https://invent.kde.org/education/kstars/-/commit/323adaebb6b30b3b11428819a03dd1f5c92f0644

diff --git a/doc/ekos-capture.docbook b/doc/ekos-capture.docbook
index bbbf7ba139..4237c7268c 100644
--- a/doc/ekos-capture.docbook
+++ b/doc/ekos-capture.docbook
@@ -510,7 +510,7 @@
                        The implementation of this process does not consider 
the strength (magnitude or flux) of the intended target, nor does it consider 
other factors which may cause an astrophotographer to choose a alternate 
sub-exposure time. These other factors may include: the storage requirements 
and extended post-processing time for a large number of short exposures, the 
impacts of external factors that might occur in very long exposures, such as 
tracking / guiding performance, changes in weather conditions which may disrupt 
seeing conditions, intrusions from air traffic or passing satellites.
         </para>
         <para>
-Approaches to imaging can vary greatly in the selection of exposure times, and 
number of sub-exposures used for integration. A well accepted approach for 
imaging deep-sky objects utilizes long exposures, requires good guiding, good 
to excellent seeing conditions, and would typically employ filtering to reduce 
the effects of light polution. At the other extreme are approaches such as 
speckle imaging techniques (commonly 'lucky imaging'), which utilize many 
hundreds to many thousands of extremely short exposures in an attempt to 
eliminate the effects of light pollution, poor seeing conditions, and poor 
guiding. Choices made for values of certain inputs to the exposure calculator 
will vary depending upon which imaging approach is being employed.</para>
+Approaches to imaging can vary greatly in the selection of exposure times, and 
number of sub-exposures used for integration. A well accepted approach for 
imaging deep-sky objects utilizes long exposures, requires good guiding, good 
to excellent seeing conditions, and would typically employ filtering to reduce 
the effects of light pollution. At the other extreme are approaches such as 
speckle imaging techniques (commonly 'lucky imaging'), which utilize many 
hundreds to many thousands of extremely short exposures in an attempt to 
eliminate the effects of light pollution, poor seeing conditions, and poor 
guiding. Choices made for values of certain inputs to the exposure calculator 
will vary depending upon which imaging approach is being employed.</para>
         <orderedlist>
             <listitem>
                                <para>
@@ -522,10 +522,10 @@ Approaches to imaging can vary greatly in the selection 
of exposure times, and n
                             <para>The range for Sky Quality is from 22 for the 
darkest skies, to 16 for the brightest (most light-polluted) skies. The 
magnitude scale is non-linear; it is a logarithmic scale based on the 5th root 
of 100. So 5 steps on the scale represent a change in brightness by a factor of 
100. (A Sky Quality of 17 is 100 times as bright as a Sky Quality of 22. Each 
full integer step on the scale is a change by a factor of approximately 
2.512.). <ulink url= "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_pollution";>Wikipedia 
Sky Brightness</ulink>  
 <ulink url= "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_pollution";>Wikipedia Light 
Pollution</ulink></para>
                             <para>
-                               All light scattered in the backgound sky is 
considered to be light pollution regardless of its source, so the effects of 
moonlight should be considered as "natural" light pollution. But weather 
conditions can also impact Sky Quality, as humidity or cloud cover can reflect 
and scatter any source of light through the atmosphere</para>
+                               All light scattered in the background sky is 
considered to be light pollution regardless of its source, so the effects of 
moonlight should be considered as "natural" light pollution. But weather 
conditions can also impact Sky Quality, as humidity or cloud cover can reflect 
and scatter any source of light through the atmosphere</para>
                             <para>
                                A <ulink url= 
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sky_quality_meter";>Sky Quality Meter 
(SQM)</ulink>
- can provide the most accurate reading of sky quality if used during an 
imaging session, but an estimated value from sky quality surveys may also be 
found on the web at sites such as <ulink url= 
"https://www.lightpollutionmap.info/";>www.lightpollutionmap.info</ulink> or 
<ulink url= "https://clearoutside.com/";>www.clearoutside.com</ulink>. But these 
on-line sources for estimated light pollution genearrly do not account for the 
effects of moonlight or local weather conditions.  So the values from light 
pollution web sites should only be considered as a “best case scenario” for a 
cloudless night during a new moon.</para> 
+ can provide the most accurate reading of sky quality if used during an 
imaging session, but an estimated value from sky quality surveys may also be 
found on the web at sites such as <ulink url= 
"https://www.lightpollutionmap.info/";>www.lightpollutionmap.info</ulink> or 
<ulink url= "https://clearoutside.com/";>www.clearoutside.com</ulink>. But these 
on-line sources for estimated light pollution generally do not account for the 
effects of moonlight or local weather conditions.  So the values from light 
pollution web sites should only be considered as a “best case scenario” for a 
cloudless night during a new moon.</para> 
                             <para>
                                If a light pollution map value is used for the 
input value of SQM, but imaging will be performed with a partial moon, then a 
decrease in the input of the SQM value should be applied in the calculator.  
Moonlight can be overwhelming; at a location where a light pollution map showed 
an SQM value of 19.63. An SQM reading was made on a night with a waxing 
crescent, shortly before half-moon, (moon age 5.4, and KStars moon magnitude = 
-10). The SQM reading at zenith showed the sky to be much brighter with 
measured value of 18.48. A reading taken on a night with a waxing gibbous, 
shortly before a full moon, (moon age 12.4, and KStars moon magnitude = -12). 
The SQM reading at zenith showed a measured SQM value of 15.95.</para>
 <para>The value of Sky Quality has a drastic impact on the calculated exposure 
because of the logarithmic scale involved.  An image taken from a location with 
heavy light pollution (a low sky quality value), especially when filtering is 
not applied, may result in a very short exposure time to prevent light 
pollution from overwhelming the target signal. An image taken from a location 
with very little light pollution (a high Sky Quality value) may result in an 
sub-exposure time of several hours.</para>
@@ -646,14 +646,14 @@ The value of image stacking is that as images are 
stacked, the accumulation of e
                         <listitem>
                             <para>
                                 <guimenuitem>Table</guimenuitem>: A table 
provides details for stacking based upon the number of hours planned for 
imaging.</para>
-<para>The table provides a quick reference for finding the appoximate number 
of sub-exposures that might be completed for a given number of hours in a 
imaging session. But some functions that consume time are not included in this 
time calculation. For example, USB based cameras typically take some time for 
data transmission, or if the user has selected automatic dithering, additional 
time will be consumed in the imaging process, which is not included in this 
time calculation.</para>
+<para>The table provides a quick reference for finding the approximate number 
of sub-exposures that might be completed for a given number of hours in a 
imaging session. But some functions that consume time are not included in this 
time calculation. For example, USB based cameras typically take some time for 
data transmission, or if the user has selected automatic dithering, additional 
time will be consumed in the imaging process, which is not included in this 
time calculation.</para>
 <para>The far right column of the table shows the calculated time/noise ratio 
of the integrated (stacked) image that would be produced.</para>
                         </listitem>
                         <listitem>
                             <para>
-                                <guimenuitem>Graph</guimenuitem>: An 
interactive graph allows the user to visualize the relative change in potential 
quality for integrated images with various counts of sub-exposures applied in 
image stacking.  This graph can be navigated through the adjustment of the 
time/noise ratio value; adjusting this value will recompute the quantity of 
sub-exposures required for the integrated image to acheive that specified 
time/noise ratio.</para>
+                                <guimenuitem>Graph</guimenuitem>: An 
interactive graph allows the user to visualize the relative change in potential 
quality for integrated images with various counts of sub-exposures applied in 
image stacking.  This graph can be navigated through the adjustment of the 
time/noise ratio value; adjusting this value will recompute the quantity of 
sub-exposures required for the integrated image to achieve that specified 
time/noise ratio.</para>
 
-<para>In the selection of a Time/Noise ratio for the calculation of the count 
of stacked exposures, the user might want consider the incremental change to 
the poterntial quailty of the image from an addtional sub-exposure. To help a 
user assess the value of increasing the number of sub-exposures for 
integration; the tool includes a calculaton of the slope for the selected point 
on the time/noise curve (the user interface uses a delta symbol to present this 
value).  This delta value represents the change in potential quality that will 
result from the addition or subtraction of a single sub-exposure.</para>
+<para>In the selection of a Time/Noise ratio for the calculation of the count 
of stacked exposures, the user might want consider the incremental change to 
the potential quality of the image from an additional sub-exposure. To help a 
user assess the value of increasing the number of sub-exposures for 
integration; the tool includes a calculation of the slope for the selected 
point on the time/noise curve (the user interface uses a delta symbol to 
present this value).  This delta value represents the change in potential 
quality that will result from the addition or subtraction of a single 
sub-exposure.</para>
 
 <para>As one should expect, at the low-end of exposure counts (when a low 
value for the Time/Noise Ratio is input), the delta value will be relatively 
high, so the addition of one image will provide a relatively large improvement 
to the integrated image.  But as a user increases the value for the Time/Noise 
Ratio, more images will be included for integration, and the delta value will 
fall, indicating that there is less to be gained from adding more sub-exposures.
 </para>
@@ -683,7 +683,7 @@ Part of the value of using a Time/Noise ratio as the input 
for the calculation o
                     <phrase>300 Second sub-exposure</phrase>
                 </textobject>
             </mediaobject>
-<para>For an integration using the 30 second sub-exposures we find that 637 
sub-exposures would be required to achieve a time/noise ratio of 80. So a total 
integration time of 5.31 hours is required with these shorter exposures to 
acheive the same time/noise ratio in the integrated image.</para>
+<para>For an integration using the 30 second sub-exposures we find that 637 
sub-exposures would be required to achieve a time/noise ratio of 80. So a total 
integration time of 5.31 hours is required with these shorter exposures to 
achieve the same time/noise ratio in the integrated image.</para>
             <mediaobject>
                 <imageobject>
                     <imagedata 
fileref="exposurecalculation-example_subexp30.png" format="PNG"/>

Reply via email to