A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » FITS
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

[fitsbits] CRPIX clarification



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old May 29th 08, 02:18 AM posted to sci.astro.fits
Jonathan McDowell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5
Default [fitsbits] CRPIX clarification


Mark,
I was a bit unclear earlier, sorry. I shouldn't try and
reply to email while on vacation!

However, I think the statement that I was making is nothing to do with
your very valid concerns. My point is that we have integer pixel numbers
(P1,P2,...) like (241,32,81) and fractional (real-valued) pixels (X1,X2,...)
like (241.3, 32.1, 81.9). Different software systems use different
schemes to map between these; I have seen both
[A] Xi = Pi Pi = (int)Xi
and
[b] Xi = Pi + 0.5 Pi = (int)(Xi-0.5)
and of course this is an independent choice from the schemes
[F] i = 1,....N
[C] i = 0,....N-1

Some people prefer the latter because then, if you
are [b],[C] then for an NxN image
the 'lower left corner of the lower left pixel' is (0.0,0.0)
and the 'upper right corner of the upper right pixel' is (N,N),
In contrast, with our scheme [A],[F], our images
run from (0.5,0.5) to (N+0.5,N+0.5) when considered as a real-valued
coordinate system, and this is seen as ugly.

You may consider that [A] is implied by the very concept of fractional
pixel coordinates and that no sane person would interpret the standard
to mean [b], but history indicates that this is a fallible assumption.

I guess in your discussion [b] is equivalent to putting the square area
such that the delta function is at one corner of it.
I think you get a wrong interpretation of the data.

On your issues (1) and (2) about the interpolation, I basically agree.
It is true that for the case with both equatorial and galactic coords
on the same image, the world coord loci of a pixel boundary are different
in the the different coord systems so the naive idea that a pixel
is a light bucket on the sky is only valid per-single-WCS etc.
Nevertheless it's a useful concept.

- Jonathan
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
[fitsbits] CRPIX clarifcation Mark Calabretta FITS 0 May 29th 08 01:15 AM
[fitsbits] CRPIX clarifcation Jonathan McDowell FITS 0 May 27th 08 07:42 PM
Clarification on Earth's age Friar Broccoli Astronomy Misc 10 May 29th 06 08:25 PM
[fitsbits] Clarification of EXTEND, please Stephen Walton FITS 8 May 19th 04 12:53 AM
[fitsbits] Clarification of EXTEND, please Thierry Forveille FITS 0 May 14th 04 06:31 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:34 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.