[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
List: kstars-devel
Subject: Re: KStars v3.5.0 Release Date?
From: Robert Lancaster <rlancaste () gmail ! com>
Date: 2020-11-12 12:18:11
Message-ID: AA58C0A0-FC49-4181-B9DA-8540EDF24B35 () gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]
So the initial keep parameter not being saved was a bug in StellarSolver before, but \
I did fix it yesterday in StellarSolver before I sent those messages last night. You \
might have missed it but I did mention that I fixed it with the other stuff I said. \
So if you were using the older version yes it was not being saved, but now it should. \
It was fixed in this commit.
https://github.com/rlancaste/stellarsolver/commit/88135877f588c977e190977afca1c5132aacbbe2
It was not being saved previously because we had added the initial keep parameter but \
then hadn't added it to the equals method nor to the options map method used in the \
file saving. Sorry I did not do this before, but I think what happened was that we \
were experimenting with the parameter, we were debating how it could be used, \
similarly to how we were in the emails yesterday, but we were still thinking about it \
and hadn't yet decided whether to leave it alone or change it, but then we moved on \
to other things and left it unfinished. But I did fix it yesterday after your email \
flagging this issue Eric and Hy's response which reminded me we hadn't finished it.
All that remains here is to add the parameter to the options profile editor in KStars \
now, which I was waiting to do until we discussed whether to keep it as is or change \
the names. I can add that to KStars next.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Nov 12, 2020, at 4:05 AM, Hy Murveit <murveit@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> 
> Eric,
>
> Not sure which issue your were confirming. The possible initialKeep bug would not \
> be minor, if it's happening it could really make processing time long for hfr and \
> focus, like the 20s you're seeing. I'd vote to fix that if it's broken. The other \
> one (spinbox) is an annoyance, I'd lean towards fixing it now, but if you twisted \
> my arm I guess I could agree to wait.
> Hy
>
> > On Thu, Nov 12, 2020, 12:56 AM Eric Dejouhanet <eric.dejouhanet@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I confirm, but this is probably a minor that can be addressed in 3.5.1.
> > eric.dejouhanet@gmail.com - https://astronomy.dejouha.net
> >
> > De: murveit@gmail.com
> > Envoyé: 12 novembre 2020 09:37
> > À: eric.dejouhanet@gmail.com
> > Répondre à : hy@murveit.com
> > Cc: mutlaqja@ikarustech.com; hy@murveit.com; rlancaste@gmail.com; \
> > sterne-jaeger@openfuture.de; kstars-devel@kde.org
> > Objet: Re: KStars v3.5.0 Release Date?
> >
> > Eric: I see. So, can you check to see you don't have a file saved that's messing \
> > things up (e.g. delete your ~/.local/share/kstars/SavedFocusProfiles.ini file if \
> > it exists, and then make sure you're using the "1-Focus Default" profile). You \
> > could play with the initialKeep and keepNum values in the \
> > kstars/ekos/auxiliary/stellarsolverprofile.cpp file in the Focus method. (Also \
> > see the note to Rob below).
> > Rob: could there be a bug that if you have a saved .ini file, then the \
> > initialKeep parameter no longer gets set and uses a very high default? I wouldn't \
> > be surprised if that's what messing Eric up.
> > Hy
> >
> > > On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 12:24 AM Hy Murveit <murveit@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Also, for the record, I do agree that Rob should either expose the initialKeep \
> > > parameter or make it a multiple of the Keep parameter. As it currently stands, \
> > > it effectively limits the maximum value of the keep parameter. H
> > >
> > > > On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 12:19 AM Hy Murveit <murveit@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Jasem: I can go either way I suppose, but in my experience, it's running \
> > > > reasonably quickly. I won't object too strongly if you want to fix it.
> > > > Eric: When I processed your images on my RPi4, they processed reasonably \
> > > > quickly:
> > > > Looking at the 1x1 image:
> > > > Computing the HFR took 1-2s, but that's using my "quick HFR" which only looks \
> > > > at stars in the middle 25% of the image. Turning off the quick HFR option \
> > > > slowed it down to 4-5 seconds (again possibly alongside guiding). Are you \
> > > > using something slower than a RPi4? Could there be something else slowing \
> > > > down the computations?
> > > > Looking at the 2x2 image:
> > > > Seemed to take 1-2s without quickhfr, and 1s or less with quickhfr.
> > > > FWIW, I run my focus with 2x2 binning of a ZWO ASI 1600.
> > > >
> > > > We should figure out what the issue is.
> > > > Hy
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Nov 11, 2020 at 11:50 PM Eric Dejouhanet \
> > > > > <eric.dejouhanet@gmail.com> wrote: Which is my case right now. But in the \
> > > > > particular subject of 3.5, I agree. I would like to know if the profiles \
> > > > > are editable by the end-user when they are saved locally, I mean, are all \
> > > > > parameters from the file loaded back properly?
> > > > > You know what I also mean here. Are there any tests validating that part?
> > > > >
> > > > > eric.dejouhanet@gmail.com - https://astronomy.dejouha.net
> > > > >
> > > > > De: mutlaqja@ikarustech.com
> > > > > Envoyé: 12 novembre 2020 08:46
> > > > > À: hy@murveit.com
> > > > > Cc: rlancaste@gmail.com; eric.dejouhanet@gmail.com; \
> > > > > sterne-jaeger@openfuture.de; kstars-devel@kde.org
> > > > > Objet: Re: KStars v3.5.0 Release Date?
> > > > >
> > > > > That's fine with me. As long as it does end up generating too many stars \
> > > > > that ends up clogging HFR calculations unnecessarily.
> > > > > --
> > > > > Best Regards,
> > > > > Jasem Mutlaq
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 10:35 AM Hy Murveit <murveit@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > Jasem,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This close to the release, I'm inclined to be conservative here and let \
> > > > > > it be. It's just something I came up with, not some reference algorithm, \
> > > > > > and it seems to be working as it was implemented. I suggest that we can \
> > > > > > play with this in 3.5.1 if you want, but not mess with this now.
> > > > > > Hy
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 11, 2020 at 11:11 PM Jasem Mutlaq <mutlaqja@ikarustech.com> \
> > > > > > > wrote: Hello Robert,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Good catch on the partition & keep stars. I think we ought to resolve \
> > > > > > > this not by simply dividing by the number of chunks as this might skew \
> > > > > > > the results. In some images, some regions are more star-rich than \
> > > > > > > others. Maybe we should do a POST star detection but PRE star filter \
> > > > > > > step where the # of stars are then trimmed to the required initial \
> > > > > > > keep?
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Best Regards,
> > > > > > > Jasem Mutlaq
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 9:41 AM Robert Lancaster \
> > > > > > > > <rlancaste@gmail.com> wrote: Oh the more significant question that I \
> > > > > > > > asked though, I don't think we addressed it yet. Right now initial \
> > > > > > > > keep doesn't work the way you meant it to due to the partitions. \
> > > > > > > > Does that need to be changed?
> > > > > > > > Sent from my iPhone
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 2020, at 1:37 AM, Robert Lancaster <rlancaste@gmail.com> \
> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Yep they are the same kind of thing when it comes to stars \
> > > > > > > > > certainly. Your argument that HFR should correlate to magnitude is \
> > > > > > > > > probably very true for stars, but not for nebulae or galaxies. \
> > > > > > > > > They can be large but dim. It also might not be true for some \
> > > > > > > > > stars with dust around them
> > > > > > > > > Sent from my iPhone
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 2020, at 1:24 AM, Hy Murveit <murveit@gmail.com> \
> > > > > > > > > > wrote:
[Attachment #3 (text/html)]
<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; \
charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto">So the initial keep parameter not being saved \
was a bug in StellarSolver before, but I did fix it yesterday in StellarSolver before \
I sent those messages last night. You might have missed it but I did mention \
that I fixed it with the other stuff I said. So if you were using the older \
version yes it was not being saved, but now it should. It was fixed in this \
commit.<div><br></div><div><a \
href="https://github.com/rlancaste/stellarsolver/commit/88135877f588c977e190977afca1c5 \
132aacbbe2">https://github.com/rlancaste/stellarsolver/commit/88135877f588c977e190977afca1c5132aacbbe2</a></div><div><br></div><div>It \
was not being saved previously because we had added the initial keep parameter but \
then hadn't added it to the equals method nor to the options map method used in the \
file saving. Sorry I did not do this before, but I think what happened was that \
we were experimenting with the parameter, we were debating how it could be used, \
similarly to how we were in the emails yesterday, but we were still thinking about it \
and hadn't yet decided whether to leave it alone or change it, but then we moved on \
to other things and left it unfinished. But I did fix it yesterday after your \
email flagging this issue Eric and Hy's response which reminded me we hadn't finished \
it.</div><div><br></div><div>All that remains here is to add the parameter to the \
options profile editor in KStars now, which I was waiting to do until we discussed \
whether to keep it as is or change the names. I can add that to KStars \
next.<br><br><div dir="ltr">Sent from my iPhone</div><div dir="ltr"><br><blockquote \
type="cite">On Nov 12, 2020, at 4:05 AM, Hy Murveit <murveit@gmail.com> \
wrote:<br><br></blockquote></div><blockquote type="cite"><div dir="ltr"><div \
dir="auto">Eric, <div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Not sure which issue \
your were confirming. The possible initialKeep bug would not be minor, if \
it's happening it could really make processing time long for hfr and focus, like the \
20s you're seeing. I'd vote to fix that if it's broken. The other one (spinbox) is an \
annoyance, I'd lean towards fixing it now, but if you twisted my arm I guess I could \
agree to wait.<div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Hy</div></div></div><br><div \
class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, Nov 12, 2020, 12:56 AM \
Eric Dejouhanet <<a \
href="mailto:eric.dejouhanet@gmail.com">eric.dejouhanet@gmail.com</a>> \
wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 \
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div \
style="background-color:rgb(255,255,255);background-image:initial;line-height:initial"><div \
id="m_3652298360928128828response_container_BBPPID" style="outline:none" dir="auto"> \
<div name="BB10" id="m_3652298360928128828BB10_response_div_BBPPID" dir="auto" \
style="width:100%"> I confirm, but this is probably a minor that can be addressed in \
3.5.1.</div> <div id="m_3652298360928128828blackberry_signature_BBPPID" name="BB10" \
dir="auto"> <div id="m_3652298360928128828_signaturePlaceholder_BBPPID" \
name="BB10" dir="auto"><p dir="ltr"><a href="mailto:eric.dejouhanet@gmail.com" \
target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">eric.dejouhanet@gmail.com</a> - <a \
href="https://astronomy.dejouha.net" target="_blank" \
rel="noreferrer">https://astronomy.dejouha.net</a></p></div> </div></div><div \
id="m_3652298360928128828_original_msg_header_BBPPID" dir="auto"> \
<table width="100%" style="border-spacing:0px;display:table;outline:none"><tbody><tr><td \
colspan="2" style="padding:initial;font-size:initial;text-align:initial"> \
<div style="border-right:none;border-bottom:none;border-left:none;border-top:1pt \
solid rgb(181,196,223);padding:3pt 0in 0in;font-family:Tahoma,"BB Alpha \
Sans","Slate Pro";font-size:10pt"> <div \
id="m_3652298360928128828from"><b>De:</b> <a href="mailto:murveit@gmail.com" \
target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">murveit@gmail.com</a></div><div \
id="m_3652298360928128828sent"><b>Envoyé:</b> 12 novembre 2020 09:37</div><div \
id="m_3652298360928128828to"><b>À:</b> <a href="mailto:eric.dejouhanet@gmail.com" \
target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">eric.dejouhanet@gmail.com</a></div><div \
id="m_3652298360928128828reply_to"><b>Répondre à :</b> <a \
href="mailto:hy@murveit.com" target="_blank" \
rel="noreferrer">hy@murveit.com</a></div><div id="m_3652298360928128828cc"><b>Cc:</b> \
<a href="mailto:mutlaqja@ikarustech.com" target="_blank" \
rel="noreferrer">mutlaqja@ikarustech.com</a>; <a href="mailto:hy@murveit.com" \
target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">hy@murveit.com</a>; <a \
href="mailto:rlancaste@gmail.com" target="_blank" \
rel="noreferrer">rlancaste@gmail.com</a>; <a \
href="mailto:sterne-jaeger@openfuture.de" target="_blank" \
rel="noreferrer">sterne-jaeger@openfuture.de</a>; <a \
href="mailto:kstars-devel@kde.org" target="_blank" \
rel="noreferrer">kstars-devel@kde.org</a></div><div \
id="m_3652298360928128828subject"><b>Objet:</b> Re: KStars v3.5.0 Release \
Date?</div></div></td></tr></tbody></table> <br> </div><div name="BB10" dir="auto" \
style="background-image:initial;line-height:initial;outline:none"><div \
dir="ltr"><b>Eric:</b> I see. So, can you check to see you don't have a file \
saved that's messing things up (e.g. delete your ~/.local/share/kstars/<a \
href="http://SavedFocusProfiles.ini" target="_blank" \
rel="noreferrer">SavedFocusProfiles.ini</a> file if it exists, and then make sure \
you're using the "1-Focus Default" profile). You could play with the initialKeep and \
keepNum values in the kstars/ekos/auxiliary/<a href="http://stellarsolverprofile.cpp" \
target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">stellarsolverprofile.cpp</a> file in the Focus \
method. (Also see the note to Rob \
below). <div><br></div><div><b>Rob:</b> could there be a bug that if you \
have a saved .ini file, then the initialKeep parameter no longer gets set and uses a \
very high default? I wouldn't be surprised if that's what messing Eric \
up.</div><div><br></div><div>Hy</div><div></div></div><br><div \
class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 12:24 \
AM Hy Murveit <<a href="mailto:murveit@gmail.com" target="_blank" \
rel="noreferrer">murveit@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote \
class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid \
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">Also, for the record, I do agree \
that Rob should either expose the initialKeep parameter or make it a multiple of the \
Keep parameter.<div>As it currently stands, it effectively limits the maximum value \
of the keep parameter.</div><div>H</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div \
dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 12:19 AM Hy Murveit <<a \
href="mailto:murveit@gmail.com" target="_blank" \
rel="noreferrer">murveit@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote \
class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid \
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div>Jasem: I can go either way I \
suppose, but in my experience, it's running reasonably quickly. I won't object too \
strongly if you want to fix it.</div><div><br></div>Eric: When I processed your \
images on my RPi4, they processed reasonably quickly:<div><br></div><blockquote \
style="margin:0px 0px 0px 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><div><i>Looking at the 1x1 \
image:</i></div><div><div><i>Computing the HFR took 1-2s, but that's using my "quick \
HFR" which only looks at stars in the middle 25% of the \
image.</i></div></div><div><div><i>Turning off the quick HFR option slowed it down to \
4-5 seconds (again possibly alongside guiding).</i></div></div><div><div><i>Are you \
using something slower than a RPi4? Could there be something else slowing down the \
computations?</i></div></div><div><div><i><br></i></div></div><div><div><i>Looking at \
the 2x2 image:</i></div></div><div><div><i>Seemed to take 1-2s without quickhfr, and \
1s or less with quickhfr.</i></div></div><div><div><i>FWIW, I run my focus with 2x2 \
binning of a ZWO ASI \
1600.</i></div></div></blockquote><div><div></div></div><div><br></div><div>We should \
figure out what the issue \
is. </div><div>Hy</div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div><br><div \
class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, Nov 11, 2020 at 11:50 \
PM Eric Dejouhanet <<a href="mailto:eric.dejouhanet@gmail.com" target="_blank" \
rel="noreferrer">eric.dejouhanet@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote \
class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid \
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div \
style="background-color:rgb(255,255,255)"><div \
id="m_3652298360928128828gmail-m_-6303917958834978578gmail-m_7337234694170452649gmail-m_2033396795361749696gmail-m_-1918649374322300733response_container_BBPPID" \
style="outline:none" dir="auto"> <div \
id="m_3652298360928128828gmail-m_-6303917958834978578gmail-m_7337234694170452649gmail-m_2033396795361749696gmail-m_-1918649374322300733BB10_response_div_BBPPID" \
dir="auto" style="width:100%"> Which is my case right now. But in the particular \
subject of 3.5, I agree. I would like to know if the profiles are editable by the \
end-user when they are saved locally, I mean, are all parameters from the file loaded \
back properly? </div><div \
id="m_3652298360928128828gmail-m_-6303917958834978578gmail-m_7337234694170452649gmail-m_2033396795361749696gmail-m_-1918649374322300733BB10_response_div_BBPPID" \
dir="auto" style="width:100%"><br></div><div \
id="m_3652298360928128828gmail-m_-6303917958834978578gmail-m_7337234694170452649gmail-m_2033396795361749696gmail-m_-1918649374322300733BB10_response_div_BBPPID" \
dir="auto" style="width:100%">You know what I also mean here. Are there any tests \
validating that part? </div> \
<div id="m_3652298360928128828gmail-m_-6303917958834978578gmail-m_7337234694170452649g \
mail-m_2033396795361749696gmail-m_-1918649374322300733response_div_spacer_BBPPID" \
dir="auto" style="width:100%"> <br></div> <div \
id="m_3652298360928128828gmail-m_-6303917958834978578gmail-m_7337234694170452649gmail-m_2033396795361749696gmail-m_-1918649374322300733blackberry_signature_BBPPID" \
dir="auto"> <div \
id="m_3652298360928128828gmail-m_-6303917958834978578gmail-m_7337234694170452649gmail-m_2033396795361749696gmail-m_-1918649374322300733_signaturePlaceholder_BBPPID" \
dir="auto"><p dir="ltr"><a href="mailto:eric.dejouhanet@gmail.com" target="_blank" \
rel="noreferrer">eric.dejouhanet@gmail.com</a> - <a \
href="https://astronomy.dejouha.net" target="_blank" \
rel="noreferrer">https://astronomy.dejouha.net</a></p></div> </div></div><div \
id="m_3652298360928128828gmail-m_-6303917958834978578gmail-m_7337234694170452649gmail-m_2033396795361749696gmail-m_-1918649374322300733_original_msg_header_BBPPID" \
dir="auto"> \
<table width="100%" style="border-spacing:0px;display:table;outline:none"><tbody><tr><td \
colspan="2"> <div \
style="border-right:none;border-bottom:none;border-left:none;border-top:1pt solid \
rgb(181,196,223);padding:3pt 0in 0in;font-family:'tahoma','bb alpha sans','slate \
pro';font-size:10pt"> <div \
id="m_3652298360928128828gmail-m_-6303917958834978578gmail-m_7337234694170452649gmail-m_2033396795361749696gmail-m_-1918649374322300733from"><b>De:</b> \
<a href="mailto:mutlaqja@ikarustech.com" target="_blank" \
rel="noreferrer">mutlaqja@ikarustech.com</a></div><div \
id="m_3652298360928128828gmail-m_-6303917958834978578gmail-m_7337234694170452649gmail-m_2033396795361749696gmail-m_-1918649374322300733sent"><b>Envoyé:</b> \
12 novembre 2020 08:46</div><div \
id="m_3652298360928128828gmail-m_-6303917958834978578gmail-m_7337234694170452649gmail-m_2033396795361749696gmail-m_-1918649374322300733to"><b>À:</b> \
<a href="mailto:hy@murveit.com" target="_blank" \
rel="noreferrer">hy@murveit.com</a></div><div \
id="m_3652298360928128828gmail-m_-6303917958834978578gmail-m_7337234694170452649gmail-m_2033396795361749696gmail-m_-1918649374322300733cc"><b>Cc:</b> \
<a href="mailto:rlancaste@gmail.com" target="_blank" \
rel="noreferrer">rlancaste@gmail.com</a>; <a href="mailto:eric.dejouhanet@gmail.com" \
target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">eric.dejouhanet@gmail.com</a>; <a \
href="mailto:sterne-jaeger@openfuture.de" target="_blank" \
rel="noreferrer">sterne-jaeger@openfuture.de</a>; <a \
href="mailto:kstars-devel@kde.org" target="_blank" \
rel="noreferrer">kstars-devel@kde.org</a></div><div \
id="m_3652298360928128828gmail-m_-6303917958834978578gmail-m_7337234694170452649gmail-m_2033396795361749696gmail-m_-1918649374322300733subject"><b>Objet:</b> \
Re: KStars v3.5.0 Release Date?</div></div></td></tr></tbody></table> <br> </div><div \
dir="auto" style="outline:none"><div dir="ltr">That's fine with me. As long as \
it does end up generating too many stars that ends up clogging HFR calculations \
unnecessarily.<div><br clear="all"><div><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div><div \
dir="ltr"><div>--</div><div>Best Regards,<br>Jasem \
Mutlaq<br></div><div><br></div></div></div></div></div></div><br></div></div><br><div \
class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 10:35 \
AM Hy Murveit <<a href="mailto:murveit@gmail.com" target="_blank" \
rel="noreferrer">murveit@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote \
class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid \
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">Jasem,<div><br></div><div>This \
close to the release, I'm inclined to be conservative here and let it \
be. </div><div>It's just something I came up with, not some reference algorithm, \
and it seems to be working as it was implemented.</div><div>I suggest that \
we can play with this in 3.5.1 if you want, but not mess with this \
now.</div><div><br></div><div>Hy</div><div><br></div></div><br><div \
class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, Nov 11, 2020 at 11:11 \
PM Jasem Mutlaq <<a href="mailto:mutlaqja@ikarustech.com" target="_blank" \
rel="noreferrer">mutlaqja@ikarustech.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote \
class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid \
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">Hello \
Robert,<div><br></div><div>Good catch on the partition & keep stars. I think we \
ought to resolve this not by simply dividing by the number of chunks as this might \
skew the results. In some images, some regions are more star-rich than others. Maybe \
we should do a POST star detection but PRE star filter step where the # of stars are \
then trimmed to the required initial keep?</div><div><br clear="all"><div><div \
dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div>--</div><div>Best Regards,<br>Jasem \
Mutlaq<br></div><div><br></div></div></div></div></div></div><br></div></div><br><div \
class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 9:41 AM \
Robert Lancaster <<a href="mailto:rlancaste@gmail.com" target="_blank" \
rel="noreferrer">rlancaste@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote \
class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid \
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">Oh the more significant question that I asked \
though, I don't think we addressed it yet. Right now initial keep doesn't work \
the way you meant it to due to the partitions. Does that need to be \
changed?<br> <br>
Sent from my iPhone<br>
<br>
> On Nov 12, 2020, at 1:37 AM, Robert Lancaster <<a \
href="mailto:rlancaste@gmail.com" target="_blank" \
rel="noreferrer">rlancaste@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br> > <br>
> Yep they are the same kind of thing when it comes to stars certainly. \
Your argument that HFR should correlate to magnitude is probably very true for stars, \
but not for nebulae or galaxies. They can be large but dim. It also might \
not be true for some stars with dust around them<br> > <br>
> Sent from my iPhone<br>
> <br>
>> On Nov 12, 2020, at 1:24 AM, Hy Murveit <<a \
href="mailto:murveit@gmail.com" target="_blank" \
rel="noreferrer">murveit@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br> >> <br>
</blockquote></div>
</blockquote></div>
</blockquote></div>
</div></div></blockquote></div>
</blockquote></div>
</blockquote></div>
</div></div></blockquote></div>
</div></blockquote></div></body></html>
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
Configure |
About |
News |
Add a list |
Sponsored by KoreLogic