Re: The "X Files" and other Trivia

[<aah@nofs.navy.mil>]

The problem with the log file is that it is being written
by a BASIC program running in a DOS window.  It is a temporary
kludge to a problem that will eventually be solved.  As such,
my additions to Tom's program were to improve the accuracy of
the exposure length and to record the starting time of each
exposure better, for the two scanning modes that I used.
These attempts are not terribly successful, since
the PC clock is free-running and Windoze interrupts make
a mockery of any attempt to obtain the start/end time.  However,
my log entries are better than using the time the raw image
files were written.  All of my changes appear on a single
line for each frame, and that line includes the word 'closed'.
Everything else is Tom's.
  The log file should disappear as soon as anyone writes
a proper data collection program, such as Chris' Linux version.
I wouldn't spend a lot of time reading it.  To me, it is
just a spot to collect engineering/test information, and not
a real logfile to be parsed.
  File 'X' used to be discarded by Tom.  I decided that it
might be possible to save this as a dark frame and labelled
it differently than the others as a distinguishing characteristic.
The problem is that it has a differing exposure length depending
on what actions occurred between the original exposure and the
readout, such as a declination move.  I didn't figure out a method
to record the actual exposure time for 'X' before I left for Europe
and had to return the BASIC code to Tom, and so just let them
record on disk but then discarded them in all subsequent processing.
Arne