Hi,
The process of calibrating and astrometrically solving, as well as identifying the var, check and 3 stars work fine.
Once I go through the photometry Cycle with the scroll once arrow; the 3 star indicators wander even though the files are solved with known RA Dec values.
As a result, the AAVSO report fails. I include the screen shot of before and after the cycle as well as the reports with question marks for values.
I'm hoping for a suggestion how to debug this last cycle process....
Hi Han,
The behaviour of the new load is different.
1. The results tab for the calibration contained only calibration files
2. When I copied the results to photometry, the raw files also appeared. ???
3. After running the cycle, it was the raw files that were checked and managed to produce the report.
Post Script. I ran it again. This time it noticed that I don't have darks for my flats. The cal_fits files have data in them, but the report is very sparse. Attached is the report for this run
16:50:32 Loading master dark file /media/patricia/6E16-84BC/astronomie2022/photométrie/20230303/master_dark_4x30s_at_-19C_2023-03-04.fit
16:50:32 Loading master flat file /media/patricia/6E16-84BC/astronomie2022/photométrie/20230303/master_flat_corrected_with_flat_darks__4xF_0xFD_2023-03-04.fit
16:50:32 █ █ █ █ █ █ Warning: Flat not calibrated with a flat-dark/bias (keywords CALSTAT or BIAS_CNT). █ █ █ █ █ █
16:50:32 Calibrating file: 1-29 "/media/patricia/6E16-84BC/astronomie2022/photométrie/20230303/rrgem_30s_20230304_042520.fits" to average. Using 4 darks, 4 flats, 0 flat-darks
16:50:32 █ █ █ Saving calibrated file as /media/patricia/6E16-84BC/astronomie2022/photométrie/20230303/rrgem_30s_20230304_042520_cal.fit
16:50:33 Calibrating file: 2-29 "/media/patricia/6E16-84BC/astronomie2022/photométrie/20230303/rrgem_30s_20230304_042651.fits" to average. Using 4 darks, 4 flats, 0 flat-darks
16:50:33 █ █ █ Saving
Hi Han,
I have posted a zip file here: https://ufile.io/59q56ygv
Please let me know that you received it ok.
Attached is the AAVSO finder chart for the area. Astap does a great job showing what stars to use for the process.
Pat
Received the file correctly. Ufile.io has become more irritating with advertisement but I could retrieve the images.
I tried the files here and it worked correctly at my side. I have no explanation what went wrong. Continue and see if it happens again. If so try to record what you did and report it to me. Any problem should be fixed.
Calibration is easiest when you load all raws in the photometry tab. Then select all (ctrl+A) and use right mouse button popup menu to calibrate them all. Yes flat-dark or bias should be present for better result.
RRgem doesn't have much flux. So the SNR is pretty low. You could have exposed much longer then 30 seconds.
Han
Last edit: han.k 2023-03-19
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Calibration is easiest when you load all raws in the photometry tab. Then select all (ctrl+A) and use right mouse button popup menu to calibrate them all. Yes flat-dark or bias should be present for better result.
4 Questions on your analysis:
1: Is this calibration different from Stack calibration only ?
I did not do ANY calibration in the photometry window. Perhaps this is the source of the problem.
2: Am I supposed to do both Stack Calibration only as well as Tools/Calibrate Photometry
(see screen shot)
How do I run calibration photometry for all images - the screen shot applies to a particular image
Could you please send me your results as a preliminary model ?
UN GROS MERCI for your help . It is very much appreciated.
1:Is this calibration different from Stack calibration only ?
No they do the same. It is just convenient todo it directly from he photometry tab
2: Am I supposed to do both Stack Calibration only as well as Tools/Calibrate Photometry
(Se screen shot)
No you don't have to worry about that. It just triggers the calibration required for the mouse pointer if you move it around. As soonit hovers above a stars the magnitude is is displayed in the status bar. In the photometry tab it is triggered automatically using the same routine.
My report is at an other computer. I will attach it to a next post.
Cheers, Han
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Hi,
The process of calibrating and astrometrically solving, as well as identifying the var, check and 3 stars work fine.
Once I go through the photometry Cycle with the scroll once arrow; the 3 star indicators wander even though the files are solved with known RA Dec values.
As a result, the AAVSO report fails. I include the screen shot of before and after the cycle as well as the reports with question marks for values.
I'm hoping for a suggestion how to debug this last cycle process....
thanks
Pat
Enclosed - other screen captures during the workflow
Hi Pat,
Sorry for the late response. I do not get an automatic email anymore after a new post.
ASTAP version 2023-2-26 had a major bug in the magnitude calculation. Replace it by the latest version.
Tell me if that fixes the problem.
Han
Hi Han,
The behaviour of the new load is different.
1. The results tab for the calibration contained only calibration files
2. When I copied the results to photometry, the raw files also appeared. ???
3. After running the cycle, it was the raw files that were checked and managed to produce the report.
Could I send you some files please ?
Attached please find the screen shots.
Pat
Hi again,
Attached is the report from this run
I'm wondering how I could send this dataset to you for inspection. Would it be possible to use weTransfer for large files ?
Perhaps this is the problem - the cal_fit images contain no data.
I am attaching a sample
Post Script. I ran it again. This time it noticed that I don't have darks for my flats. The cal_fits files have data in them, but the report is very sparse. Attached is the report for this run
16:50:32 Loading master dark file /media/patricia/6E16-84BC/astronomie2022/photométrie/20230303/master_dark_4x30s_at_-19C_2023-03-04.fit
16:50:32 Loading master flat file /media/patricia/6E16-84BC/astronomie2022/photométrie/20230303/master_flat_corrected_with_flat_darks__4xF_0xFD_2023-03-04.fit
16:50:32 █ █ █ █ █ █ Warning: Flat not calibrated with a flat-dark/bias (keywords CALSTAT or BIAS_CNT). █ █ █ █ █ █
16:50:32 Calibrating file: 1-29 "/media/patricia/6E16-84BC/astronomie2022/photométrie/20230303/rrgem_30s_20230304_042520.fits" to average. Using 4 darks, 4 flats, 0 flat-darks
16:50:32 █ █ █ Saving calibrated file as /media/patricia/6E16-84BC/astronomie2022/photométrie/20230303/rrgem_30s_20230304_042520_cal.fit
16:50:33 Calibrating file: 2-29 "/media/patricia/6E16-84BC/astronomie2022/photométrie/20230303/rrgem_30s_20230304_042651.fits" to average. Using 4 darks, 4 flats, 0 flat-darks
16:50:33 █ █ █ Saving
Hi Pat,
The calibrated FITS file seems damaged. Something goes wrong in the calibration.
Note in the popup menu of the photometry tab there is an option to calibrate them directly. But both methods should work.
Send me some files for testing. I will check tomorrow. weTransfer would do fine. Or you could drop them zipped at :
https://ufile.io/
and send me the link. Zipped is easier to retrieve individual files . Or use Google drive and share them
Han
Hi Han,
I have posted a zip file here: https://ufile.io/59q56ygv
Please let me know that you received it ok.
Attached is the AAVSO finder chart for the area. Astap does a great job showing what stars to use for the process.
Pat
Hi, Pat,
Received the file correctly. Ufile.io has become more irritating with advertisement but I could retrieve the images.
I tried the files here and it worked correctly at my side. I have no explanation what went wrong. Continue and see if it happens again. If so try to record what you did and report it to me. Any problem should be fixed.
Calibration is easiest when you load all raws in the photometry tab. Then select all (ctrl+A) and use right mouse button popup menu to calibrate them all. Yes flat-dark or bias should be present for better result.
RRgem doesn't have much flux. So the SNR is pretty low. You could have exposed much longer then 30 seconds.
Han
Last edit: han.k 2023-03-19
Correction SNR of RRGem was pretty low so poor.
Calibration is easiest when you load all raws in the photometry tab. Then select all (ctrl+A) and use right mouse button popup menu to calibrate them all. Yes flat-dark or bias should be present for better result.
4 Questions on your analysis:
1: Is this calibration different from Stack calibration only ?
I did not do ANY calibration in the photometry window. Perhaps this is the source of the problem.
2: Am I supposed to do both Stack Calibration only as well as Tools/Calibrate Photometry
(see screen shot)
How do I run calibration photometry for all images - the screen shot applies to a particular image
Could you please send me your results as a preliminary model ?
UN GROS MERCI for your help . It is very much appreciated.
Last edit: Pat Browne 2023-03-19
No they do the same. It is just convenient todo it directly from he photometry tab
No you don't have to worry about that. It just triggers the calibration required for the mouse pointer if you move it around. As soonit hovers above a stars the magnitude is is displayed in the status bar. In the photometry tab it is triggered automatically using the same routine.
My report is at an other computer. I will attach it to a next post.
Cheers, Han
This is what I saved on the hard disk:
Bonsoir!
Hmmm... I followed your example, loaded the raw images into the photometry tab...
Seletct all , calibrate selected, then ran the process.
This produced a successful report!
Perhaps somehow the «stack calibrate only» was the problem.
I shall pursue the next target using calibrate of raw files from the photometry tab...
Joyeux PRINTEMPS!