Skip to content
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

Review loading of filter information #121

Open
AarynnCarter opened this issue Dec 13, 2023 · 0 comments
Open

Review loading of filter information #121

AarynnCarter opened this issue Dec 13, 2023 · 0 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@AarynnCarter
Copy link
Collaborator

Currently, filter information can be ported into spaceKLIP through two possible resources:

  1. WebbPSF, which uses ETC engine files
  2. SVO FPS, which uses... something.

The value are slightly different between each, potentially due to how the wavelengths are defined (WebbPSF uses a bp.avgwave(), whereas SVO uses the effective wavelength).

There is an issue in that SVO does not have the MIRI FND filter, so currently WebbPSF must be used for the MIRI filters. These are the lines in question from database.py:

# Load NIRCam, NIRISS, and MIRI filters
wave_nircam, weff_nircam, do_svo = get_filter_info('NIRCAM', return_more=True)
wave_niriss, weff_niriss = get_filter_info('NIRISS', do_svo=do_svo)
wave_miri,   weff_miri   = get_filter_info('MIRI',   do_svo=False) 

Ideally, we should homogenise the approach, and use the same resource for each instrument. OR ensure that WebbPSF and SVOFPS give consistent results, so that using WebbPSF for MIRI is not a significant issue.

@mperrin mperrin added the enhancement New feature or request label Dec 21, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants