Re: Everything is Hotsy-Totsy Now

[Tom Droege <tdroege2@earthlink.net>]

Mike and all,

Now comes the fun part.  You ask:

>If so, how much cloud cover is too much? If not, should/could the system
>be automated to skip those pairs of images that crash the pipeline?
>With regard to flats, I noticed that Michael added a parameter in
>make_flat.param to differentiate between observation flats and
>twilight/light box/etc. flats. How would the clouds affect the flats?

Well, I suppose that clouds would make sky flats better.  But we have some 
light box data, and I am using that.

The fun part is looking at the data and letting it tell us what to 
do.  Fortunately, not all stars are variable.  So the runs are full of 
calibration data - the fixed stars.  We just have to figure out how to use 
it.

I think my next plan will be to reduce a lot of images to stars and then 
pass out a CD of star measurements.

This will let you all develop programs to look at the lists and correct the 
measurements.  Then to write programs to look for interesting stuff.

Who knows, the record jacket does not say.  But Hotsy-Totsy is definitely a 
roaring twenties thing, I think.  I also think Coon-Sanders had the hit.

Tom Droege




At 09:08 PM 5/8/02 -0500, you wrote:
>Tom et al,
>
> >Tom Droege wrote:
> >
> > That is what I was playing on my CD when the run ended.  One of the hits of
> > 1925 played by the Coon-Sanders Nighthawks.
>
>So, did they coin the phrase Hotsy-Totsy? Just asking, it might be one
>of those trivial pieces of knowledge with which to wow friend and family
>:-)
>
>I just finished processing Disks 4 & 5 from DS20. I had some problems
>with the first few pairs of images. I assumed it was from the clouds. I
>skipped the first five pairs and everything ran without a hitch.
>
>A couple of questions:
>Apparently, from looking at the next few images I didn't skip, we are
>able to process these images even with some clouds. Would we want to
>(does it affect the photometry)?
>If so, how much cloud cover is too much? If not, should/could the system
>be automated to skip those pairs of images that crash the pipeline?
>With regard to flats, I noticed that Michael added a parameter in
>make_flat.param to differentiate between observation flats and
>twilight/light box/etc. flats. How would the clouds affect the flats?
>
>Now back to the pipeline. Disks 7 & 8 await.
>
>Mike