# Fix routine errors when getting LATISS raws

XMLWordPrintable

#### Details

• Type: Story
• Status: To Do
• Resolution: Unresolved
• Fix Version/s: None
• Component/s:
• Labels:
• Urgent?:
No

#### Description

Grab any LATISS raw (I think) and you always see the following warnings:

 WARNING:lsst.obs.lsst.translators.latiss:/lsstdata/offline/instrument/LATISS/storage/2020-03-12/AT_O_20200312_000197--R00S00.fits(AT_O_20200312_000197): Dark time less than exposure time. Setting dark time to the exposure time. 

and

 WARNING:lsst.obs.lsst.assembly:/lsstdata/offline/instrument/LATISS/storage/2020-03-12/AT_O_20200312_000197--R00S00.fits: outAmp.getRawBBox() != data.getBBox(); patching. ((minimum=(0, 0), maximum=(543, 2047)) v. (minimum=(0, 0), maximum=(575, 2047)) 

The latter should be easy to fix, by just changing the camera definition to match reality. The former could be annoying, because I'm not sure we all agree on the definition of "dark time" - some think it's the total integration time, and some think it's the excess over the exposure time. I think this is the source of the issue.

#### Activity

Hide
Tim Jenness added a comment -

It would be wonderful if the definition of dark time in ObservationInfo had some type of standard definition...

Show
Tim Jenness added a comment - It would be wonderful if the definition of dark time in ObservationInfo had some type of standard definition...
Hide
Robert Lupton added a comment -

How do you want to resolve this? For what it's worth, I think it's the time from the last CCD wipe to the readout.

Show
Robert Lupton added a comment - How do you want to resolve this? For what it's worth, I think it's the time from the last CCD wipe to the readout.
Hide
Tim Jenness added a comment -

If the DARKTIME header is being filled properly and the warning is a mistake we fix the warning. If the headers are still wrong then the warning seems to be correct and the fix is to fix the header.

Show
Tim Jenness added a comment - If the DARKTIME header is being filled properly and the warning is a mistake we fix the warning. If the headers are still wrong then the warning seems to be correct and the fix is to fix the header.
Hide
Merlin Fisher-Levine added a comment -

Well, if we take Robert's definition as The Truth, then the warning can't be wrong, as you could never have darktime less than the exposure time. Given that, I think it means the header "are wrong", but I think the problem is that the people writing them don't agree that that's "wrong", IIRC.

Show
Merlin Fisher-Levine added a comment - Well, if we take Robert's definition as The Truth, then the warning can't be wrong, as you could never have darktime less than the exposure time. Given that, I think it means the header "are wrong", but I think the problem is that the people writing them don't agree that that's "wrong", IIRC.
Hide
Tim Jenness added a comment -

Have fun at the CAP meeting then. CAP-430 is open and seems relevant.

Show
Tim Jenness added a comment - Have fun at the CAP meeting then. CAP-430 is open and seems relevant.

#### People

Assignee:
Unassigned
Reporter:
Merlin Fisher-Levine
Watchers:
Christopher Waters, Jonny Esteves, Merlin Fisher-Levine, Robert Lupton, Tim Jenness