From: Robert A. Knop Jr. (robert.a.knop@vanderbilt.edu)
Date: Tue May 07 2002 - 19:28:50 PDT
> I looked at 2 of the 4 X-tel subtractio0ns. My conclusion:
> about 3 to 4 times harder to scan .
> series of lines which look like interference bands.
> a lot of false candidates on these lines.
> if looked at with zoom the junk can (laboriously ) be eliminated.
> I believe that SNe could be found.
There is residual fringing in the reference images. I suspect it's
because the Frogs only had two fields-- much harder to make a good
reference field. I tried to make a fringe map myself from their
flatfielded data, and had no success; I eventually gave up.
With same-telescope data, the fringes would partially cancel each
other. Of course, no such luck with cross-telescope data.
There's nothing to it but to laboriously eliminate the junk. That's the
game we play. It's harder, but we have to grin and bear it. Not
everything is roses.
-Rob
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue May 07 2002 - 19:29:06 PDT