From: Vallery Stanishev (vall@physto.se)
Date: Mon Apr 26 2004 - 02:08:32 PDT
Hello Lifan,
Which images do you mean? Those I used for the "shift & add" (and the
corresponding shifts)? If so, no problem. However, we don't have FTP
server here. Perhaps I may copy the files on your FTP? Just tell me
where....
Cheers,
Vallery
Lifan Wang wrote:
> Hi, Vallery,
>
> Can you make the raw stamp images together with the x,y offset
> applied for the drizzle available ?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Lifan
>
> On Thu, 22 Apr 2004, Vallery Stanishev wrote:
>
>
>>Hi,
>>
>>I started working on the grism data. On the bottom of the Twikki page
>>some figures can be seen. The SN is visible but the signal is very low
>>and in addition the spectrum is heavily contaminated by the close bright
>>galaxy. Have to find a way to get rid of it before any extraction of the
>>spectrum is attempted.
>>
>>Another problem is that the direct image is too shalow and the position
>>of the SN could not be accurately determined. This will affect the
>>accuracy of the wavelength solution. I put some rough wavelength marks
>>on one of the 2D images.
>>
>>On the third image (not directly visible from the page) are shown the
>>output of Multidrizzle and simpe shift & add. They seem to be almost
>>identical. The shifts for the "shift & add" image were determined from
>>the 0th orders of 4 bright compact sourses on CCD2. The images were
>>shifted by IRAF's IMSHIFT with frac. pixel shifts and interpolation type
>>'drizzle[0.5]'. For the multidrizzle image shifts were not supplied and
>>the info comes from the headers (for the moment). PIXFRAC and SCALE 1
>>were used.
>>
>>
>>Vallery
>>
>>
>>
>>Rachel A. Gibbons wrote:
>>
>>>Hi,
>>>
>>> Tony noticed that in my previous e-mail the days past discovery should
>>>read
>>>
>>>1) 9 days (~3.5 rest frame days)
>>>
>>>2) 13 days (~5 rest frame days).
>>>
>>> However, my conclusions are based on the correct scaling. Also, to be
>>>precise, the data are consistent with discovery at rest B max. Sorry for
>>>any confusion.
>>>
>>>Rachel
>>>
>>>On Mon, 19 Apr 2004, Rachel A. Gibbons wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Hi everyone,
>>>>
>>>> It would appear our data are completely consistent with a supernova at
>>>>z=1.6 which was discovered at rest-frame optical maximum.
>>>>
>>>> Here's an update from the first round of follow-up ACS and NICMOS
>>>>photometry :
>>>>
>>>> 1) The discovery z' magnitude was z'=25.1 and 12 days later z'=25.5.
>>>>
>>>> 2) 16 days after discovery, the new J and H magnitudes are 24.37 and
>>>>24.03.
>>>>
>>>> All mags quoted here are Vega.
>>>>
>>>> The remainder of the follow-up observations for this candidate will be
>>>>in J & H and will extend through 23 May (yes, that's during the next
>>>>search run).
>>>>
>>>> It's unfortunate we're following it on the decline, but it's looking
>>>>good! Hooray!
>>>>
>>>>Rachel
>>>>
>>>>PS Sorry, no news yet to report on the grism data, except that we have it
>>>> and they pointed HST at the right part of the sky.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
-- ******************************************************** Dr. Vallery Stanishev Stockholm University AlbaNova University Center FYSIKUM 106 91 Stockholm SWEDENtel: +46 8 55378731 fax: +46 8 55378601 vall@physto.se vall_1@yahoo.com ********************************************************
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Apr 26 2004 - 02:09:02 PDT