-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 11
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Cosmos multiband notebook #320
Conversation
Check out this pull request on See visual diffs & provide feedback on Jupyter Notebooks. Powered by ReviewNB |
Oh and I just noticed that the plotting function writes "gri images" no matter what bands we select, so we may want to fix this. Maybe in another PR ? |
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## develop #320 +/- ##
========================================
Coverage 88.99% 88.99%
========================================
Files 11 11
Lines 1445 1445
========================================
Hits 1286 1286
Misses 159 159
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
@@ -68,9 +68,7 @@ | |||
"id": "975ddc32", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I noticed the names of the files are a bit confusing _fits.fits
,is there another name we can use to make it clear the information that each file contains?
Reply via ReviewNB
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
maybe a different suffix we can use for both catalog files? I think we can change all filenames accordingly if there is a better name you can think of
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes I used those names to follow the convention of the original COSMOS dataset, i.e., catalog.fits
for the catalog containing information for real galaxies and catalog_fits.fits
for the catalog containing the information for parametric galaxies. The thing is that galsim automatically looks for files named with this convention, so I do not think we can set other names unless we change galsim...
When making our extended galsim COSMOS dataset, I also wondered in which catalog I should put the EL-COSMOS HSC multiband magnitudes (both options are possible because we merge both catalogs in the BTK catalog class) and I think the second one makes sense because those magnitudes come from fits, but I may put them in the first catalog (along with the original HST magnitude of galaxies) if we think it makes more sense.
Here is the PR related to #316.
I just added some multiband HSC images using the catalog already there. The next iterations may provide some better looking galaxies but it may be better to stay on the first one so that the user gets the same results.