Export of quality d...
 
Share:
Notifications
Clear all

Export of quality data  

  RSS

(@infinnity-deck)
Brown Dwarf Customer
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 6
January 24, 2021 15:35  

Hi Mabula,

perhaps it already exists, but I could not find it: I would appreciate to have an ASCII-file export of the quality scores of all the subs in the processing. Such a file would allow me to analyse the set-up and to see if there is correlation between quality and regions or periods (both on a small and large scale). Preferably such a file would comprise (at least) of the following data:

- Date
- Time
- Temperature (if available from FITS header)
- Humidity (if available from FITS header)
- Pressure (if available from FITS header)
- Image coordinates in RA/DEC (this may vary due to dithering)
- Image coordinates in ALT/AZI
- Star count
- Star roundness (median?)
- FWHM (median?)
- Background level (ADU)
- Noise (ADU)
- Any other readily available quality indicator that I missed here...
- A field indicating whether or not the sub was rejected based on quality

Thanks in advance!

Nicolàs


ReplyQuote
(@mabula-admin)
Universe Admin
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 2523
January 27, 2021 18:20  

Hi Nicolàs @infinnity-deck,

There is no such option yet. I have added it to my todo list, but it will take some time before this can be implemented because of other higher priorities.

I think it is usefull idea though, so therefore I added it to my ToDo list.

For your information, the quality scores are a relative score, so you will need to treat it as such. A score of 1000 for a certain image scale can be a completely different score in terms of actual quality of the data, when compared to a score of 1000 for another image scale shot at another location with another telescope.... so for 1 single setup with the same equipment you can use it to deduct meaningfull information when you vary the exposure time for instance.

Mabula


ReplyQuote
(@infinnity-deck)
Brown Dwarf Customer
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 6
January 27, 2021 19:45  

Hi Mabula,

thanks for your response, I am glad you like the idea and am willing to include it. That the quality figure is relative is fine for my application as I am always imaging using the same set-up. Besides, once implemented, I would also have the separate quality indicators as eccentricity and FWHM to my availability.

Hopefully you to-do list is not too long 😉 (but then I am not in a great hurry).

cheers,

Nicolàs


ReplyQuote
Share: