Uploaded image for project: 'Data Management'
  1. Data Management
  2. DM-26327

Add support for x-flipped WCS in gen3 formatters

    XMLWordPrintable

    Details

    • Story Points:
      1
    • Team:
      Architecture
    • Urgent?:
      No

      Description

      I might be missing something but it looks like the DECam WCS uses the flipX parameter in gen2 for raw data but it doesn't in gen3. I'm not entirely sure how that can be true.

      Regardless LATISS will need flipping (DM-24592) so I need to add a class property to raw formatter base to indicate whether flipX should be applied. Should be quick.

        Attachments

          Issue Links

            Activity

            Hide
            tjenness Tim Jenness added a comment -

            Krzysztof Findeisen would you mind taking a look at this. It's a couple of lines. The main issue being that gen3 DECam WCS seems to be wrong without this and I'm wondering if you noticed in your DECam gen3 tests.

            Merlin Fisher-Levine I'm including the gen3 LATISS fix in this ticket. Let me know if you would rather subsume it into your gen2 WCS fixes.

            Show
            tjenness Tim Jenness added a comment - Krzysztof Findeisen would you mind taking a look at this. It's a couple of lines. The main issue being that gen3 DECam WCS seems to be wrong without this and I'm wondering if you noticed in your DECam gen3 tests. Merlin Fisher-Levine I'm including the gen3 LATISS fix in this ticket. Let me know if you would rather subsume it into your gen2 WCS fixes.
            Hide
            krzys Krzysztof Findeisen added a comment -

            All I know is that when running on DECam I had to do:

            config.defineVisits.computeVisitRegions.active.padding = 32768
            

            Back when I was doing DM-23616 I had to skip astrometry (for reasons related to refcat handling), which is where I assume a parity error would show up.

            Show
            krzys Krzysztof Findeisen added a comment - All I know is that when running on DECam I had to do: config.defineVisits.computeVisitRegions.active.padding = 32768 Back when I was doing DM-23616 I had to skip astrometry (for reasons related to refcat handling), which is where I assume a parity error would show up.
            Hide
            krzys Krzysztof Findeisen added a comment -

            Looks good, just minor comments.

            Show
            krzys Krzysztof Findeisen added a comment - Looks good, just minor comments.
            Hide
            tjenness Tim Jenness added a comment -

            Thanks for the quick review. Hopefully DECam WCS is going to be better now...

            Show
            tjenness Tim Jenness added a comment - Thanks for the quick review. Hopefully DECam WCS is going to be better now...
            Hide
            krzys Krzysztof Findeisen added a comment -

            As of the time of writing DECam WCS seems to be improved, in that at least I'm getting matching patches for image differencing:

            >>> for x in butler.registry.queryDatasets(datasetType="deepCoadd", collections="templates/deep"): print(x)
            ...
            deepCoadd@{abstract_filter: g, skymap: deepCoadd_skyMap, tract: 0, patch: 509}, sc=ExposureF] (id=2)
            deepCoadd@{abstract_filter: g, skymap: deepCoadd_skyMap, tract: 0, patch: 465}, sc=ExposureF] (id=3)
            deepCoadd@{abstract_filter: g, skymap: deepCoadd_skyMap, tract: 0, patch: 466}, sc=ExposureF] (id=4)
            deepCoadd@{abstract_filter: g, skymap: deepCoadd_skyMap, tract: 0, patch: 510}, sc=ExposureF] (id=5)
            deepCoadd@{abstract_filter: g, skymap: deepCoadd_skyMap, tract: 0, patch: 464}, sc=ExposureF] (id=6)
            deepCoadd@{abstract_filter: g, skymap: deepCoadd_skyMap, tract: 0, patch: 419}, sc=ExposureF] (id=7)
            deepCoadd@{abstract_filter: g, skymap: deepCoadd_skyMap, tract: 0, patch: 420}, sc=ExposureF] (id=8)
            >>> for x in butler.registry.queryDataIds({"visit", "detector", "tract", "patch"}, dataId={"instrument": "DECam", "exposure": 411420, "detector": 10}): print(x)
            ...
            {abstract_filter: g, instrument: DECam, skymap: deepCoadd_skyMap, detector: 10, physical_filter: g DECam SDSS c0001 4720.0 1520.0, tract: 0, visit_system: 0, patch: 419, visit: 411420}
            {abstract_filter: g, instrument: DECam, skymap: deepCoadd_skyMap, detector: 10, physical_filter: g DECam SDSS c0001 4720.0 1520.0, tract: 0, visit_system: 0, patch: 464, visit: 411420}
            {abstract_filter: g, instrument: DECam, skymap: deepCoadd_skyMap, detector: 10, physical_filter: g DECam SDSS c0001 4720.0 1520.0, tract: 0, visit_system: 0, patch: 419, visit: 411420}
            {abstract_filter: g, instrument: DECam, skymap: deepCoadd_skyMap, detector: 10, physical_filter: g DECam SDSS c0001 4720.0 1520.0, tract: 0, visit_system: 0, patch: 465, visit: 411420}
            {abstract_filter: g, instrument: DECam, skymap: deepCoadd_skyMap, detector: 10, physical_filter: g DECam SDSS c0001 4720.0 1520.0, tract: 0, visit_system: 0, patch: 420, visit: 411420}
            {abstract_filter: g, instrument: DECam, skymap: deepCoadd_skyMap, detector: 10, physical_filter: g DECam SDSS c0001 4720.0 1520.0, tract: 0, visit_system: 0, patch: 419, visit: 411420}
            {abstract_filter: g, instrument: DECam, skymap: deepCoadd_skyMap, detector: 10, physical_filter: g DECam SDSS c0001 4720.0 1520.0, tract: 0, visit_system: 0, patch: 465, visit: 411420}
            {abstract_filter: g, instrument: DECam, skymap: deepCoadd_skyMap, detector: 10, physical_filter: g DECam SDSS c0001 4720.0 1520.0, tract: 0, visit_system: 0, patch: 420, visit: 411420}
            {abstract_filter: g, instrument: DECam, skymap: deepCoadd_skyMap, detector: 10, physical_filter: g DECam SDSS c0001 4720.0 1520.0, tract: 0, visit_system: 0, patch: 464, visit: 411420}
            

            There are still other problems with running DECam in Gen 3, but at least this one seems to be out of the way.

            Show
            krzys Krzysztof Findeisen added a comment - As of the time of writing DECam WCS seems to be improved, in that at least I'm getting matching patches for image differencing: >>> for x in butler.registry.queryDatasets(datasetType="deepCoadd", collections="templates/deep"): print(x) ... deepCoadd@{abstract_filter: g, skymap: deepCoadd_skyMap, tract: 0, patch: 509}, sc=ExposureF] (id=2) deepCoadd@{abstract_filter: g, skymap: deepCoadd_skyMap, tract: 0, patch: 465}, sc=ExposureF] (id=3) deepCoadd@{abstract_filter: g, skymap: deepCoadd_skyMap, tract: 0, patch: 466}, sc=ExposureF] (id=4) deepCoadd@{abstract_filter: g, skymap: deepCoadd_skyMap, tract: 0, patch: 510}, sc=ExposureF] (id=5) deepCoadd@{abstract_filter: g, skymap: deepCoadd_skyMap, tract: 0, patch: 464}, sc=ExposureF] (id=6) deepCoadd@{abstract_filter: g, skymap: deepCoadd_skyMap, tract: 0, patch: 419}, sc=ExposureF] (id=7) deepCoadd@{abstract_filter: g, skymap: deepCoadd_skyMap, tract: 0, patch: 420}, sc=ExposureF] (id=8) >>> for x in butler.registry.queryDataIds({"visit", "detector", "tract", "patch"}, dataId={"instrument": "DECam", "exposure": 411420, "detector": 10}): print(x) ... {abstract_filter: g, instrument: DECam, skymap: deepCoadd_skyMap, detector: 10, physical_filter: g DECam SDSS c0001 4720.0 1520.0, tract: 0, visit_system: 0, patch: 419, visit: 411420} {abstract_filter: g, instrument: DECam, skymap: deepCoadd_skyMap, detector: 10, physical_filter: g DECam SDSS c0001 4720.0 1520.0, tract: 0, visit_system: 0, patch: 464, visit: 411420} {abstract_filter: g, instrument: DECam, skymap: deepCoadd_skyMap, detector: 10, physical_filter: g DECam SDSS c0001 4720.0 1520.0, tract: 0, visit_system: 0, patch: 419, visit: 411420} {abstract_filter: g, instrument: DECam, skymap: deepCoadd_skyMap, detector: 10, physical_filter: g DECam SDSS c0001 4720.0 1520.0, tract: 0, visit_system: 0, patch: 465, visit: 411420} {abstract_filter: g, instrument: DECam, skymap: deepCoadd_skyMap, detector: 10, physical_filter: g DECam SDSS c0001 4720.0 1520.0, tract: 0, visit_system: 0, patch: 420, visit: 411420} {abstract_filter: g, instrument: DECam, skymap: deepCoadd_skyMap, detector: 10, physical_filter: g DECam SDSS c0001 4720.0 1520.0, tract: 0, visit_system: 0, patch: 419, visit: 411420} {abstract_filter: g, instrument: DECam, skymap: deepCoadd_skyMap, detector: 10, physical_filter: g DECam SDSS c0001 4720.0 1520.0, tract: 0, visit_system: 0, patch: 465, visit: 411420} {abstract_filter: g, instrument: DECam, skymap: deepCoadd_skyMap, detector: 10, physical_filter: g DECam SDSS c0001 4720.0 1520.0, tract: 0, visit_system: 0, patch: 420, visit: 411420} {abstract_filter: g, instrument: DECam, skymap: deepCoadd_skyMap, detector: 10, physical_filter: g DECam SDSS c0001 4720.0 1520.0, tract: 0, visit_system: 0, patch: 464, visit: 411420} There are still other problems with running DECam in Gen 3, but at least this one seems to be out of the way.

              People

              Assignee:
              tjenness Tim Jenness
              Reporter:
              tjenness Tim Jenness
              Reviewers:
              Krzysztof Findeisen
              Watchers:
              Krzysztof Findeisen, Merlin Fisher-Levine, Tim Jenness
              Votes:
              0 Vote for this issue
              Watchers:
              3 Start watching this issue

                Dates

                Created:
                Updated:
                Resolved:

                  Jenkins Builds

                  No builds found.