From: Robert A. Knop Jr. (robert.a.knop@vanderbilt.edu)
Date: Sat May 11 2002 - 20:29:39 PDT
> We lately achieved to run CTIO-CFHT subtractions.
> We did not try to find candidates, but we checked
> C02-020 (Dwalin). We could not see anything on the subtraction.
I was never real happy about that candidate anyway; the large %INC could
be due to an unhappy coincidence of a fringe dip in the ref, or
similar. It's already ranked low and unlikely to be done. Given that
you didn't find it, I'm ready to just kill this candidate as not real.
> About C02-020 (cand0017), we were able to search it on the images
> we got last night from CFHT (according to the queue schedule).
> again we do not see anything. The images we got last night are
> slightly extinct (from normal to 0.7 mags), with a 0.9" seeing.
> The S/N reached is comparable to about 30 mn in good conditions.
It's junk then; we won't think about it further.
>
> I was not able to get a subtraction for C02-027 because the overlap
> between CTIO and CFHT chips happens to be miserable for the chips
> involved. And it is on the field (D1) for which the data we got
> yesterday from CFHT hardly reaches I=21.
Yeah, according to sntrak and numbers squirreled away elsewhere (the
"chip" parameter of the subng structure if anybody knows how to read
that) this was about 200 or so pixels from the edge of one of our
cross-telescope subtractions.
-Rob
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat May 11 2002 - 20:29:55 PDT