Philips
Vesta (PCVC675) SC2 cooled camera tests Here
are some test results of my cooled Vesta SC2
camera.
Test A: Cooling down
Test B: Switching amplifier ON/OFF
Test C: Comparing
sensitivity of camera with amplifier ON/OFF
Test D: Saturation of
image with amplifier OFF
Test E: Influence of
resistor between collector and emitor of CCD Amp switch
transistor
Test
A: Cooling Down
Ambient temperature: 26°C
Exposure: 120 seconds
Gain: 100%
CCD Amplifier ON
The camera was attached to computer for 30 minutes to
achieve its working temperature. The ambient temperature
was 26°C. The first frame was exposed without cooling.
Then the cooling system was switched on immediatelly. The
temperature of CCD chip was stabilized after 8-10 minutes
of cooling.
0 minutes (start) |
After 2 minutes of cooling |
After 4 minutes of cooling |
After 6 minutes of cooling |
After 8 minutes of cooling |
After 10 minutes of cooling (temperature
stabilized) |
Test
B: Switching Amplifier ON/OFF
Ambient temperature: 26°C
Exposure: 120, 300, 600 seconds
Gain: 100%
CCD Amplifier ON/OFF
The camera was attached to computer and cooled down for
20 minutes to achieve its working temperature. The
ambient temperature was 26°C.
Amplifier ON |
Amplifier OFF |
120s, gain 100% |
120s, gain 100% |
300s, gain 100% |
300s, gain 100% |
600s, gain 100% |
600s, gain 100% (some glow is visible at top-left) |
Test
C: Comparing Sensitivity of Camera with Amplifier ON/OFF
Ambient temperature: 26°C
Exposure: variable
Gain: 100%
CCD Amplifier ON/OFF
The camera was attached to computer and cooled down for
20 minutes to achieve its working temperature. The
ambient temperature was 26°C.
Image is reverted, because of camera position (ventilator
on top). I didn't want to revert it to proper position
because I wanted to keep the amplifier glow position at
top-left. The room was totally dark, only my laptop
screen was a little shining (in oposite direction than
photographed scene). That's why image has some blue tone.
Some very low light is penetrating through our blind from
our city (visible on the wall near vase).
The image with amplifier OFF is darker than the image
with the same exposure, but with amplifier ON. As my
constructed image shows, it is caused by bias caused by
glowing amplifier. By addition of two frames - one with
scene with amplifier OFF + one blurred dark frame (because
of removing hot pixels) with amplifier ON we obtain the
very similar image like with scene with amplifier ON. So
it seems, that the sensitivity of camera is the same with
amplifier ON and OFF.
90s, gain 100%, amp ON |
120s, gain 100%, amp OFF |
120s, gain 100%, amp ON |
150s, gain 100%, amp OFF |
Construction of 120s, gain 100%, amp ON (in PhotoPaint).
Constructed from
Photo 120s, gain 100%, amp OFF picture +
blurred DarkFrame 120s, gain 100%, amp ON (blurred
because of removing hot pixels from DF) |
240s, gain 100%, amp OFF
Some granulation in wall is visible - it is some
problem with amplifier OFF mode and bright areas. |
Test
D: Saturation of image with amplifier OFF
Ambient temperature: 26°C
Exposure: variable
Gain: 50%, 100%
CCD Amplifier ON/OFF
After doing SC2 modification I tested the camera in
daylight. I set amplifier gain to 0%. At first I thought,
that it was not working, and all my work was useless. The
picture was still of the same intesity regardless of
exposure length. When I tested the exposure with amp ON,
the image was totaly white (overexposed), when I used
longer exposure time (it's correct behaviour).
I experimented with switching amplifier ON/OFF during
exposure and found out, that switching amplifier OFF
causes limitation of video signal to some saturation
level. I used 10s exposure time. When I switched
amplifier OFF for 5 seconds at start of exposure, the
result image was similar as if I used 5s exposure with
amp ON. When I switched amplifier OFF for 5 seconds at
the end of exposure, the result image was very dark and
grainy.
After the first disappointment I tested the camera in
the evening. When I set amplifier gain to higher values,
I noticed that amp OFF mode is working with some
limitations.
The camera was attached to computer and cooled down
for 20 minutes to achieve its working temperature. The
ambient temperature was 26°C.
Image is reverted, because of camera position (ventilator
on top). I didn't want to revert it to proper position
because I wanted to keep the amplifier glow position at
top-left. The room was lighted by constant light,
exposure time was altered from 2s to 120s.
The experiment shows some strange behaviour of webcam
with amplifier OFF - if low gain is selected, than the
image become saturated in some level of exposure and
further lengthening of exposure time have no influence to
light parts (only darker parts become lighter).
Furthermore in saturated parts some granularity is
visible. Fortunatelly, the phenomenon doesn't not occur
if I set aplifier gain to 100%. The lower gain is set,
the lower is saturation level in amp off mode. When gain
is set to 0%, then picture is saturated also when short
exposures are used (0.5s) and is grainy and dark.
Images were captured in 320x240 resolution and were
resampled to 50% size.
Here is full size of saturated image (120s, gain 50%,
amp OFF). Granularity is apparently visible.
Test
E: Influence of resistor between collector and emitor of
CCD Amp switch transistor
Ambient temperature: 26°C
Exposure: variable
Gain: 100%
CCD Amplifier ON/OFF
If some problems occur, there is an advice on Steve
Chamber's pages to add auxiliary resistor between
collector and emitor of CCD amplifier switch transistor.
Although the resistor helps to solve the problem of
saturation of my CCD chip in lower gain, it also causes
that amplifier is not switched off totally, thence some
amplifier glow is visible. Here is comparison of 180s and
600s exposures with various resitors.
180s, Amp OFF, no resistor |
180s, Amp OFF, 680 ohm resistor |
180s, Amp OFF, 390 ohm resistor |
180s, Amp ON |
600s, Amp OFF, no resistor |
600s, Amp OFF, 680 ohm resistor |
Back to Philips
Vesta (PCVC675) LONG EXPOSURE SC2 modification page
Computer generated images,
real images, drawings and texts are property of the
author and may not be reproduced or used without
permission of author.
Last Update: 14.09.2005
|