Uploaded image for project: 'Data Management'
  1. Data Management
  2. DM-16235

Jointcal PhotoCalib returns negative calibrations

    XMLWordPrintable

    Details

      Description

      import lsst.daf.persistence as dafPersist
      tract = 9813
      visit = 23692
      ccd = 62
      root = '/datasets/hsc/repo/rerun/RC/w_2018_41/DM-16011-jointcal'
      butler = dafPersist.Butler(root)
      photoCalib = butler.get('jointcal_photoCalib', visit=visit, ccd=ccd, tract=tract)
      

      >>> photoCalib.getInstFluxMag0()
      -278609934862735.6
      >>> butler.get('jointcal_photoCalib_filename', visit=visit, ccd=ccd, tract=tract.getId())
      ['/datasets/hsc/repo/rerun/RC/w_2018_41/DM-16011-jointcal/jointcal-results/HSC-R/9813/jointcal_photoCalib-0023692-062.fits']
      >>> str(photoCalib)
      'TransformBoundedField on Box2I(Point2I(0, 0), Extent2I(2048, 4176)) with mean: -3.59376e-15 err: 2.98536e-17'
      >>> photoCalib.instFluxToMaggies(100)
      -3.589247456278528e-13
      >>> photoCalib.instFluxToMaggies(100, lsst.geom.Point2D(0,0))
      3.9565953264617065e-12
      

        Attachments

          Issue Links

            Activity

            Hide
            Parejkoj John Parejko added a comment -

            Krzysztof Findeisen: do you mind taking on this review? It's smaller than I'd initially said, because the proper fix is being pushed off to DM-16305, and this solution is just a stop-gap (but with more robust tests to watch for the triggering condition). It's ~60 lines of afw and ~180 lines of jointcal, so not so big.

            If jira doesn't show it, here's the afw PR: https://github.com/lsst/afw/pull/409

            Show
            Parejkoj John Parejko added a comment - Krzysztof Findeisen : do you mind taking on this review? It's smaller than I'd initially said, because the proper fix is being pushed off to DM-16305 , and this solution is just a stop-gap (but with more robust tests to watch for the triggering condition). It's ~60 lines of afw and ~180 lines of jointcal, so not so big. If jira doesn't show it, here's the afw PR: https://github.com/lsst/afw/pull/409
            Show
            Parejkoj John Parejko added a comment - Jenkins run: https://ci.lsst.codes/blue/organizations/jenkins/stack-os-matrix/detail/stack-os-matrix/28951/pipeline
            Hide
            krzys Krzysztof Findeisen added a comment -

            afw changes look good. jointcal changes could use some work, but nothing that requires re-review.

            Show
            krzys Krzysztof Findeisen added a comment - afw changes look good. jointcal changes could use some work, but nothing that requires re-review.
            Show
            Parejkoj John Parejko added a comment - post review jenkins run: https://ci.lsst.codes/blue/organizations/jenkins/stack-os-matrix/detail/stack-os-matrix/28963/pipeline
            Hide
            Parejkoj John Parejko added a comment -

            Big thanks for the quick review. I think I got everything, one way or another. We can discuss expectations about logging next week: I think it's a broader conversation.

            Merged and done.

            Show
            Parejkoj John Parejko added a comment - Big thanks for the quick review. I think I got everything, one way or another. We can discuss expectations about logging next week: I think it's a broader conversation. Merged and done.

              People

              Assignee:
              Parejkoj John Parejko
              Reporter:
              yusra Yusra AlSayyad
              Reviewers:
              Krzysztof Findeisen
              Watchers:
              Jim Bosch, John Parejko, John Swinbank, Krzysztof Findeisen, Sophie Reed, Yusra AlSayyad
              Votes:
              0 Vote for this issue
              Watchers:
              6 Start watching this issue

                Dates

                Created:
                Updated:
                Resolved: