|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
[fitsbits] fitsverify and "implied" table columns themselves...?
Yup. I should have gone on to say that making those keywords into
constant valued columns simply shuts up fitsverify, it doesn't make it any more of a valid way of conveying the WCS information. Note that in the SDFITS convention, each row is a N-dimensional image with all but the first axis being degenerate (i.e. each row is a spectrum). Since some of the WCS information for each row may change per row (the most common being CRVAL1 when the spectral axis is in the topocentric frame) it's convenient to store that as a column so that you can still store many spectra in each table. But the bottom line is that the original SDFITS convention (late 80's) predates the WCS papers and it needs to be tweaked a bit to follow the WCS papers. There are other issues with SDFITS that I haven't felt like revisiting so I've been reluctant to restart that conversation with the interested parties. Bob William Pence wrote: The new FITS Standard document, in table 8.2, defines the keyword naming convention (taken from the WCS papers) that one should use if the image is stored as a multidimensional vector in a binary table column. (See http://fits.gsfc.nasa.gov/standard30...rd30index.html page 77). Here are some examples, where 'i' is the axis number, 'n' is the column number that contains the image, and 'a' is the optional alternate axis label from A to Z): Primary Array Bintable vector ------------- --------------- CTYPEia iCTYPn or iCTYna CRVALia iCRVLn or iCRVna CDELTia iCDLTn or iCDEna -Bill Bob Garwood wrote: That appears to be the SDFITS convention, which predates the WCS papers and agreements. The WCS information in those tables is unlikely to be widely understood as a result. The SDFITS convention needs to be updated to take into account the accepted ways of conveying WCS information in binary tables. If the DATA array column dominates the table size, then I suspect adding a few extra scalar columns won't greatly increase the table size. -Bob Mike Nolan wrote: We're writing radio data in binary tables, and fitsverify hates them: 133) fitsverify /share/pdata1/pdev/x108.20080826.b0s1g0. 00800.fits fitsverify 4.13 (CFITSIO V3.090) -------------------------------- File: /share/pdata1/pdev/x108.20080826.b0s1g0.00800.fits 2 Header-Data Units in this file. =================== HDU 1: Primary Array =================== 16 header keywords Null data array; NAXIS = 0 =================== HDU 2: BINARY Table ==================== *** Error: Keyword #29, CTYPE1 is not allowed in the Bin/ASCII table. *** Error: Keyword #31, CTYPE2 is not allowed in the Bin/ASCII table. *** Error: Keyword #44, CTYPE2G is not allowed in the Bin/ASCII table. ... many more similar errors Some of the WCS parameters are table columns: COMMENT axis 1 is the frequency axis TTYPE6 = 'CRVAL1 ' / Center frequency TFORM6 = '1D ' / TUNIT6 = 'Hz ' / TDISP6 = 'D13.5 ' / TTYPE7 = 'CDELT1 ' / Frequency interval TFORM7 = '1D ' / TUNIT7 = 'Hz ' / TDISP7 = 'D13.5 ' / TTYPE8 = 'CRPIX1 ' / Pixel of center frequency TFORM8 = '1D ' / TUNIT8 = ' ' / TDISP8 = 'D13.5 ' / but others are constant, so we're putting them in the table header per the "Green Bank Convention". CTYPE1 = 'FREQ ' / Type of coordinate CUNIT1 = 'Hz ' / Unit of center frequency These files are massive and written at 80 MB/s, so we really don't want to make them any bigger than they have to be. Does that really make us bad people? Or have I missed something? Thanks, -Mike _______________________________________________ fitsbits mailing list http://listmgr.cv.nrao.edu/mailman/listinfo/fitsbits |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
[fitsbits] fitsverify and "implied" table columns themselves...? | William Pence[_2_] | FITS | 0 | August 27th 08 06:39 PM |
[fitsbits] fitsverify and "implied" table columns themselves...? | Bob Garwood | FITS | 0 | August 27th 08 05:52 PM |
[fitsbits] fitsverify and "implied" table columns themselves...? | Mike Nolan | FITS | 0 | August 27th 08 05:14 PM |
15 answers to nonsense being spread by "creation science,""intelligent design," and "Expelled" | Kickin' Ass and Takin' Names[_1_] | Amateur Astronomy | 1 | April 29th 08 01:29 PM |
"Constant failure"; "The greatest equations ever"; "The Coming Revolutions in Particle Physics" | fishfry | Astronomy Misc | 0 | February 13th 08 02:38 AM |