Column "FWHM Mean"

[asteroidguy]

Using the latest daily build, 3.4.0.14 - something is odd about the column FWHM_Mean. I would expect this value to be the mean FWHM derived from all selected stars.
Example: I do aperture photometry on two stars in radial profile mode. All values, except for the very first row, do not seem to be the average of the FWHM values for T1 and C2. A few rows in, FWHM_Mean is close, but not exactly, the sum of FWHM_T1 and FWHM_C2.
Am I misunderstanding the meaning of this column or is this a bug?

[karenacollins]

Could you post your measurements table as a file attachment, or send it to karenacollins at outlook dot com?

Karen

On 6/18/2020 7:52 PM, asteroidguy [via AstroImageJ] wrote:

Using the latest daily build, 3.4.0.14 - something is odd about the column FWHM_Mean. I would expect this value to be the mean FWHM derived from all selected stars.
Example: I do aperture photometry on two stars in radial profile mode. All values, except for the very first row, do not seem to be the average of the FWHM values for T1 and C1. A few rows in, FWHM_Mean is close, but not exactly, the sum of FWHM_T1 and FWHM_C1.
Am I misunderstanding the meaning of this column or is this a bug?

---

If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:

http://astroimagej.1065399.n5.nabble.com/Column-FWHM-Mean-tp1370.html

To start a new topic under AstroImageJ, email [hidden email]
To unsubscribe from AstroImageJ, click here.
NAML

[karenacollins]

Thanks for sending the measurements table.

Yep, that was a bug no one had pointed out previously. It should be fixed in the latest daily build 3.4.0.16.

Karen

[asteroidguy]

Thanks for fixing it so quickly!