Re: Calculation of error ?

Posted by PieterVuylsteke on May 19, 2021; 9:27pm
URL: http://astroimagej.170.s1.nabble.com/Calculation-of-error-tp1561p1564.html

Hi Karen,

Thank you for your answer. 

I do find it bizare that the Amag error is indicated as being 0.7, whilst this is the curve of the star, with a "visible" error of about 0.02mag. That is quite a difference ?

Or do I make a mistake in interpretation ?

Kind Regards,
Pieter.

Op wo 19 mei 2021 om 22:55 schreef karenacollins [via AstroImageJ] <[hidden email]>:

Hi Pieter,

Yes, AMag error is in magnitude. However, Source_Error is in ADU (or counts), rather than magnitude. The error will always be given in the same units as the value.

Appendix D in the AIJ paper here describes most or all of the data values found in the measurements table.

Regarding your question: "Do I still have to enter values for the readout and dark current noise, when treating them as in Image Sequence in AstroImageJ ? I did enter the e/ADU value for the gain of the camera, and left those two other values at zero."
- AIJ will still work correctly if readout and dark current are set to zero. However, the photometric errors/uncertainties may be underestimated. This will be less of an issue for bright targets, and more of an issue for faint targets. In either case, only the calculated uncertainties will be affected, not the nominal measured values.

Karen

---

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

http://astroimagej.1065399.n5.nabble.com/Calculation-of-error-tp1561.html

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

---

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

http://astroimagej.1065399.n5.nabble.com/Calculation-of-error-tp1561p1563.html

To unsubscribe from Calculation of error ?, click here.
NAML