<p>It's pretty easy to create a dataset for yourself using remotely controlled telescopes. I've used iTelescope in the past and had a good experience. Their "starter" account costs $20 and should be good to get you going.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-04-28T15:37:06.120Z
Why is this being voted down? He's looking for data; generating it himself is a way to do that. It also lets him control what data is collected and how (which is instructive itself and lets this be more than an academic exercise.)
blamblambunny
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-04-29T12:46:28.143Z
I assume @loggy's motivation is to contribute something for the astronomer community. Why should he pay to be able to do it? Anyway, I think the answer is still valid, though maybe not best option. (I did not down-vote.)
mmh
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-04-29T14:51:38.490Z
@mmh -- thanks for the explanation. I'm not saying he should have to pay, just that there are options that let him gather exactly the data he needs, even if he doesn't have a telescope.
blamblambunny
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-04-28T14:16:49.887Z
2015-04-28T14:16:49.887Z
blamblambunny
<p>Data from observatory archives is a good way to go. Here is another one with tons of imaging datasets: <a href="http://archive.eso.org" rel="nofollow">http://archive.eso.org</a></p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-05-03T06:58:27.747Z
2015-05-03T06:58:27.747Z
onekiloparsec
<p>You could use archival data, e.g., from the WISE mission: <a href="http://irsa.ipac.caltech.edu/applications/wise/" rel="nofollow">http://irsa.ipac.caltech.edu/applications/wise/</a></p>

<p>The data are reduced as well as photometrically and astrometrically calibrated, which should make the image combination a lot easier. Just type in random coordinates and download data for a field with the desired number of frames.</p>

<p>You can also try other observatories, for example, Gemini, Spitzer, ... to obtain well-calibrated test data.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-04-26T17:17:08.900Z
2015-04-26T17:17:08.900Z
mommermi
<p>Try the NASA data catalog,  <a href="https://data.nasa.gov/data" rel="nofollow">https://data.nasa.gov/data</a>.
Also Try the Keck Observatory Archive, KOA, <a href="http://nexsci.caltech.edu/archives/koa/index.shtml" rel="nofollow">http://nexsci.caltech.edu/archives/koa/index.shtml</a>.
Look for raw images. of clusters or galaxies.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-04-26T22:06:25.543Z
2015-04-26T22:06:25.543Z
blue0cean
<p>I am looking for sets of astronomical images for testing different kinds of stacking algorithms.</p>

<p>The idea is simple: if one has $N$ images of the same object, the signal-to-noise ratio of the averaged image increases with $\sqrt{N}$ under certain conditions.</p>

<p>Where could I obtain data for testing?</p>

<p>PS. I would propose adding the tags "image", "ccd", "research", "signal processing", and "machine learning".</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-03-21T23:20:41.593Z
I am working on an idea that needs stacking algorithms, I can provide plenty of data, however, not astronomical. Perhaps we can help each other out. alexanderpodgorny@skype
Lex Podgorny
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-01-27T22:13:00.913Z
Unfortunately the idea isn't that simple.  Given a perfect camera in perfect circumstances stacking would have no effect.  So the actual, real world, circumstances and cameras must be taken into account.  Different types of noise will affect the image in different ways.  I see several people below have suggested data from professional observatories.  But, if you're looking to apply this to consumer level equipment, from crappy skies, you'll want data from consumer level equipment.
Greg Miller
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-01-27T22:17:26.803Z
Here's a video from Dr Robin Glover that goes into the cost/benefits of different types of noise and attempts to eliminate them on consumer level equipment. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3RH93UvP358
Greg Miller
<observational-astronomy><amateur-observing><photography><image-processing>
Image sets for testing stacking algorithms?
loggy
# Image sets for testing stacking algorithms?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2015-04-25)

I am looking for sets of astronomical images for testing different kinds of stacking algorithms.

The idea is simple: if one has $N$ images of the same object, the signal-to-noise ratio of the averaged image increases with $\sqrt{N}$ under certain conditions.

Where could I obtain data for testing?

PS. I would propose adding the tags "image", "ccd", "research", "signal processing", and "machine learning".

**Tags:** observational-astronomy, amateur-observing, photography, image-processing
> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: I am working on an idea that needs stacking algorithms, I can provide plenty of data, however, not astronomical. Perhaps we can help each other out. alexanderpodgorny@skype  
> **username_2**: Unfortunately the idea isn't that simple.  Given a perfect camera in perfect circumstances stacking would have no effect.  So the actual, real world, circumstances and cameras must be taken into account.  Different types of noise will affect the image in different ways.  I see several people below have suggested data from professional observatories.  But, if you're looking to apply this to consumer level equipment, from crappy skies, you'll want data from consumer level equipment.  
> **username_2**: Here's a video from Dr Robin Glover that goes into the cost/benefits of different types of noise and attempts to eliminate them on consumer level equipment. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3RH93UvP358  

---

## 4 answers

### Answer by username_3 on 2015-04-28. Score: 2

It's pretty easy to create a dataset for yourself using remotely controlled telescopes. I've used iTelescope in the past and had a good experience. Their "starter" account costs $20 and should be good to get you going.

> **Comments:**
> **username_3**: Why is this being voted down? He's looking for data; generating it himself is a way to do that. It also lets him control what data is collected and how (which is instructive itself and lets this be more than an academic exercise.)  
> **username_4**: I assume @loggy's motivation is to contribute something for the astronomer community. Why should he pay to be able to do it? Anyway, I think the answer is still valid, though maybe not best option. (I did not down-vote.)  
> **username_3**: @mmh -- thanks for the explanation. I'm not saying he should have to pay, just that there are options that let him gather exactly the data he needs, even if he doesn't have a telescope.  

---

### Answer by username_5 on 2015-05-03. Score: 1

Data from observatory archives is a good way to go. Here is another one with tons of imaging datasets: <http://archive.eso.org>


---

### Answer by username_6 on 2015-04-26. Score: 1

You could use archival data, e.g., from the WISE mission: <http://irsa.ipac.caltech.edu/applications/wise/>

The data are reduced as well as photometrically and astrometrically calibrated, which should make the image combination a lot easier. Just type in random coordinates and download data for a field with the desired number of frames.

You can also try other observatories, for example, Gemini, Spitzer, ... to obtain well-calibrated test data.


---

### Answer by username_7 on 2015-04-26. Score: 1

Try the NASA data catalog, <https://data.nasa.gov/data>.
Also Try the Keck Observatory Archive, KOA, <http://nexsci.caltech.edu/archives/koa/index.shtml>.
Look for raw images. of clusters or galaxies.


---

