Re: coordinates

From: Rachel A. Gibbons (ragibbons@lbl.gov)
Date: Sat May 22 2004 - 17:29:42 PDT

  • Next message: Rachel A. Gibbons: "There were no tilt01 subtractions in April."

    Hi Marek,

        Yes, I noticed this was true for some of the tiles. These small
    offsets can't be avoided without calibrating better off the GOODS release.

        So, people shouldn't be alarmed, just notice when there's an already
    saved candidate nearby, it could mean the one you're looking at has
    already been saved.

        By the way, you will find that not all tiles are off in the same
    direction with respect to the GOODS release. We checked all subtractions
    against GOODS before Rob put them up for scanning. That is *not* to say
    that we did an error-free job across the board. We whipped through April
    subtractions more quickly.

    Thanks,

    Rachel

    On Sat, 22 May 2004, Robert A. Knop Jr. wrote:

    > On Sat, May 22, 2004 at 05:13:26PM -0700, Marek Kowalski wrote:
    > > Hi Rob,
    > > in case you are not sleeping already...
    > > I have cross-checked a few of our SN coordinates with that of the GOODS
    > > field (v1.0) and there seems to be a constant off-set of about 1.5-2 ''
    > > in the DEC coordinate (the GOODS are lower). Gerson has also noticed
    > > that acs04b-016 is candidate acs04-195 from the April search, but its
    > > coordinates are off by 2" in DEC. The reason for the shift is likely the
    > > same. Can you think of a reason for the shift? I presume it should not
    > > worry us at this stage.
    >
    > 2" doesn't worry me ever, even if it's consitent.
    >
    > -Rob
    >
    >

    -- 
    ------------------------------
    Dr. R. A. Gibbons
    Lawrence Berkeley National Lab
    1 Cyclotron Rd MS 50R5032
    Berkeley, CA 94720-8160
    USA
    Tel 510.486.7416
    ------------------------------
    


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat May 22 2004 - 17:30:22 PDT