If you want the final image to be the residual image rather than the restored image, make bmaj negative.
If you really want to see exactly where the CLEAN components come from in the image, make bmaj and bmin very small ( say). The restored image will then be the residuals plus delta functions where the CLEAN components were found. If you are truly a masochist, and want to see an image of the CLEAN components (the true CLEAN model), then subtract the residual image from this image with COMB.
For beams with a high sidelobe response, the simple algorithm that fits the beam is prone to failing. Sometimes it knows it fails, and tells you, other time the program crashes. For poor beams, you should measure the FWHM of the beam yourself (make a contour plot) and enter the beam parameters into bmaj, bmin and bpa. When the beam fitting algorithm fails, it gives an arbitrary value for the FWHM. The usual signature is that the major and minor axis FWHM are identical.
APCLN | |
inname,inclass | Dirty image |
inseq,indisk | |
in2name,in2class | Dirty beam |
in2seq,in2disk | |
outname,outclass | Fully specify when |
outseq,outdisk | restarting CLEAN |
blc(3)=10 | Clean plane 10, say, of input image |
invers=0 | Make CC file next highest version |
gain =0.1 | Loop gain |
phat=0 | No prussian helmet |
flux=0 | Terminate CLEAN at this residual level or |
niter=500 | specify total number of CLEAN components |
biter=0 | Number already CLEANed if restarting |
bmaj=0 | CLEAN beam. If 0, program tries |
bmin=0 | to fit main lobe of dirty beam to |
bpa=0 | work it out. If bmaj negative the |
output image is the residual image | |
nbox=0 | CLEAN window defaults |
box=0 | to inner quarter of image |
factor=0 | Speedup factor; -1 for extended |
sources, +1 for point sources | |
minpatch=127 | Minimum beam size for minor cycles |
dotv=1 | Display residual images on TV |
The total CLEANed flux density (i.e., the cumulative sum of the CLEAN components) should eventually settle down to a roughly constant number (you can look at this with the task PRTCC). This indicates that you are just picking up noise, and that there are no side lobes left to remove. If the total CLEANed flux starts to decrease again, this usually indicates that you have been a bit heavy handed, and CLEANed too much. You might also look at the result and see if you can see any side-lobes left over.
Some discussion of the zero spacing was given in the imaging section (§ 15). It is the deconvolution step that really tells you whether you managed to get the combination of the zero spacing and its weight correct. If you did, the total CLEANed flux should be equal to the zero spacing. If you got it wrong, this will not be the case, and one often sees the CLEAN window region badly offset from the rest of the image. You will know when you need to try again.