Deep Public Survey Reports from Users HOME INDEX SEARCH HELP NEWS

DPS_2.0 (07 Mar 2001):

From: Mischa Schirmer
Subject: Re: FITS extension
Date: Wed, Oct 31, 2001 at 01:56:02PM +0100
hi roberto, thanks for your quick reply. i suppose the deep-2c data is in /export/data/prerelease/WFI/images/released_20010305 i tried to extract the image part for the R-Band. first i had a look at the tables, obviously there is a table with the image data, however it appears not to have a extension name that i could specify using "fitssplit" using "IMAGE" as a name doesn't work, neither putting a ""
fitssplit -i deep2c_FR_2001-03-01T09:50:01.fits -x IMAGE
> Reading catalog(s)
> *Error*: could not find extension
well, that's it for the moment... is there any other way for extracting fits tables? Mischa

DPS_1.1 (09 May 2001):

Subject: infos about our CDF reduction
Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2001 12:30:42 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Emanuele Daddi
To:
CC: Andrea Cimatti

Dear Benoit, I just talked to Andrea Cimatti, who was asked by Luiz Da Costa about the exact specification of the frames that we used for our reduction of the CDF in K. I'm sending you this information here. If you want to do a first check you could begin from CDF 2, also called previously AXAF1, that in your paper is number _2-3_. The information I have available is about the number of the discarded frames in the sequence of the night. The reason for discarding could be something like bad sky subtraction, or seeing, or photometry, or satellite track, etc etc. Anyway generally all the frames were used for determining the sky background, not to create time holes.
AXAF1 was observed on 4 August, 5 August and 9 November (1999 ?). The discarded frames are:

4 August: 181, 202, 237->240
5 August: 1->5, 60->79 (this night was clearly NON-photometric for AXAF1)
9 Nov: none discarded

The numers refer to the original file names: e.g. on 9 Nov the AXAF1 files were:
FiltK_Box45_Nexp60_0001.fits --> FiltK_Box45_Nexp60_0060.fits

I hope these informations can be helpful to you. I cannot enter in more details now, as I'm leaving for observations. In case I'll have more time after 20 August or so.
Cheers
Emanuele

Subject:Re: EIS JK reduction.
Date:Mon, 6 Aug 2001 13:48:48 +0200 (MET DST)
From:Andrea Cimatti
To:bvandame@eso.org

Dear Benoit
I would like to do that, but I cannot do it now because the people who took care of the reductions with DIMSUM/IRDR/ISAAC etc etc are not reachable in thie period (vacation).
I thought about it: I strongly suggest you to do independent tests within the EIS team. For example, you could reduce the same set of images with your software and with DIMSUM and IRDR, and then make your own comparison.
Otherwise, I am afraid you have to wait till the end of the month or september to get the information you need from us.

Please let me know
Andrea

Subject: notes
Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2001 15:39:28 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Andrea Cimatti
To: bvandame@eso.org

--------------------------------------------------------------------
TESTS ON Ks-band PHOTOMETRY IN THE CDFS (August 2001)
--------------------------------------------------------------------

These are the results of some tests that we did on the CDFS images (CDFS1 and CDFS2 fields in the inner part of the CDFS). The comparisons were made using SExtractor to measure the magnitudes and the photometry was made using fixed apertures (2"3",4") and "total" magnitudes (like mag_BEST or mag_AUTO). However, the results are always the same, rather independently on the type of magnitude used.
The plots I show you are relative to 4" diameter aperture photometry which should be taken as a good estimate of the total magnitude of faint objects. We excluded from the analysis all the objects with problems as flagged by SExtractor.
We compared:
K(DIMSUM), K(EIS), K(IRDR) and K(ISAAC)
where
K(DIMSUM) = magnitudes measured on the images reduced with DIMSUM
K(EIS) = magnitudes measured on the images reduced with the EIS sw
K(IRDR) = magnitudes measured on the images reduced with IRDR
(IRDR is a new software developed by Mcmahon to reduce near-IR data)
K(ISAAC) = magnitudes measured on the ISAAC image of the central < part of the SOFI CDFS1. The ISAAC image was reduced with DIMSUM.

The results seem to show consistently that the EIS reduction leads to underestimate the flux of faint objects, whereas the agreement between DIMSUM, IRDR and ISAAC is rather good (within the photometric uncertainties) and it does not show any appreciable systematic effects.

Apparently, the same problems occur in the J-band images (however, only J(EIS) and J(ISAAC) were compared in this case).
The tests were made by P. Saracco, E. Daddi, A. Cimatti & A. Fontana.

Send comments to <eisadm@eso.org>  Last update: Oct 31, 2001