Re: Test of T0004 transfer

From: Yannick Mellier <mellier_at_iap.fr>
Date: Thu, 17 May 2007 20:06:09 +0200

     Dear JJ


"In future releases , perhaps the .reg file should not have an 'filter'
name [although it is build off the i-band image]? "

    Yes, sure. I can even rename all now and if Fred or any DOG does not
see any issue, we can send them without 'filter name'.

     Cheers

yannick

JJ Kavelaars wrote:
>
>
> Having 1 .reg file per field is good, I will adjust the dataset
> completeness rules.
>
> In future releases , perhaps the .reg file should not have an 'filter'
> name [although it is build off the i-band image]?
>
> JJ
>
>
>
> On 17-May-07, at 10:03 AM, Yannick Mellier wrote:
>
>>
>> Dear JJ
>>
>> No, we have one .reg file per field. In fact I already produced
>> the 199 masks for all Deep D1/2/3/4 and Wide W1/2/3/4, even for the
>> fields that have not been observed yet.
>> There is this naming convention we agreed on at the beginning when I
>> did each masks after we got the i-band image only. I keep the naming
>> rule, CFHTLS_*_i_*.reg but the mask is valid for all filters.
>>
>> Yannick
>>
>> JJ Kavelaars wrote:
>>> On 26-Apr-07, at 10:36 AM, Frederic Magnard wrote:
>>>> CFHTLS_W_i_023319-070000_T0004.reg ds9 region file
>>> Is there a plan to have .reg files coming with every filter/catalog
>>> combination? The test batch that was sent 2 weeks ago only has a
>>> .reg file 1 of the filters [i-band, see entry above]. I'm currently
>>> flagging stacks that DON'T have a .reg flag as 'partially incomplete'.
>>> Also... please start sending the stacks ASAP. Just put them in the
>>> e-transfer area and we will start pulling them over. The transfer
>>> will take a few days and we will not manage to achieve your stated
>>> May 20 goal at this point since the transfer of files will take too
>>> long.
>>> JJ
>>
>>
>
Received on Thu May 17 2007 - 08:06:17 HST