Custom Query (432 matches)
Results (205 - 207 of 432)
| Ticket | Resolution | Summary | Owner | Reporter |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| #247 | fixed | HY05/02, flight day 153/2009, Ayrshire Coalfields | knpa | jatt |
| Description |
Data location: ~arsf/arsf_data/2009/flight_data/uk/HY05_02-2009_153_Ayrshire_coalfields Data arrived from ARSF via SATA disk M on 9th June 2009. Scientific objective: N/K Priority: α4M PI: C Fleming Sensors:
|
|||
| #248 | fixed | HY05/06, flight day 152b/2009, Pitlocry | knpa | jatt |
| Description |
Data location: ~arsf/arsf_data/2009/flight_data/uk/HY05_06-2009_152b_Pitlocry Data arrived from ARSF via SATA disk M on 9th June 2009. Scientific objective: N/K Priority: α4L PI: M Cutler Sensors:
|
|||
| #249 | invalid | Rescaling dark frames causes calibration errors | benj | benj |
| Description |
Processing data in azspec and using the -dIc option to rescale dark frames seems to cause the data to be incorrectly radiometrically calibrated. I've attached three screenshots. dIc_ex1.png shows spectral profiles for the rescaled flightline from both azspec (top) and CaliGeo (bottom). You can see that the azspec spectrum goes up at both ends, where the CaliGeo spectrum doesn't. The azspec spectrum also has values that are consistently about 600 higher than CaliGeo (discounting the edges of the spectrum, which as mentioned are much higher). dIc_ex2.png shows spectral profiles from the second flightline, which did not require the dark frames to be rescaled. Azspec and CaliGeo are in very close agreement for this line. odd_one_out.png is just for illustration - it shows all of the Eagle lines from that flight (as processed through azspec) overlaid. The first flightline (with the rescaled dark frames) is clearly visible as different - much whiter than the other lines. This may affect any datasets from 2006, and some VOCALS data. |
|||