== '''Template Stacks''' ==


'''STEP 1'''[[BR]]


'''Stack for testing on skycell with good target already selected ''' [[BR]]

'''MD03''' [[BR]]

'''g skycell.043 stack.'''[[BR]]

'''r skycell.043 stack.39693'''[[BR]]

'''i skycell.043 stack.'''[[BR]]



'''STEP 2'''[[BR]]

I'm selecting good stacks looking the following 4 parameters in the unconvolved stacks:
average fhwm Minimum;   average fhwm Major;   average moment along xx;  average momentum along yy
Once a good night is selected in each filter, I checked 3-4 skycells by eyes and run ppSub using these images as template.
The good stacks I suggest as teplate are reported below, followed by a summary of all the steps I did.[[BR]]

'''MD02'''[[BR]]

FILTER JD stacks.image.ID[[BR]]

g     55191     40790-40893[[BR]]

r     55188     44942-45045[[BR]]

i     55180     39135-39238[[BR]]

z     55096     31535-31604 [[BR]]


[[Image(MD02.png, 800px)]][[BR]]


''' MD03''' 
[[BR]]

FILTER JD stacks images[[BR]]

g [[BR]]


r     55207     41983-42082 (both good)[[BR]]

r     55183     39667-39770 (both good)[[BR]]

i [[BR]]

z [[BR]]

[[Image(MD03.png, 800px)]][[BR]]

'''MD04'''[[BR]]

FILTER JD stacks images[[BR]]

g [[BR]]

r [[BR]]

i [[BR]]

z [[BR]]


[[Image(MD04.png, 800px)]][[BR]]

Here is all the step I'm doing what I'm doing:  [[BR]]

* Download all new stacks in the archive[[BR]]

* Run psphot on unconvolved images [[BR]]

* Compare the following parameters from cmf files: [[BR]]

   PSF magnitudes vs aperture magntude [[BR]]

   moment along x vs moment along y [[BR]]
 
   minimum fwhm vs major fwhm [[BR]]

[[Image(MD04.skycell.044.stk.41186.cmf_1.png, 400px)]][[BR]]
[[Image(MD04.skycell.099.stk.38684.cmf_1.png, 400px)]][[BR]]

 '''COMMENTS:'''

the unconvolved images have more detections (but probably several of them are not real)
the FWHM of the objects is degradated in the convolved image (probably too much in some skycells)
To investigate the quality of stacks and select good templates, I used the fwhm and moments values of the unconvnolved images.



 The average values for each skycell is computed rejecting at 3 sigma (5 iterations) [[BR]]

* I'm comparing the values of these parameters in each filters and each field  [[BR]]

* taking a look by eyes some of the skycells of the best epochs, I choose the best templates  [[BR]]

 some epochs with small fwhm and moments (in principle good templates) seem to be masked too much  [[BR]]

[[Image(MD02.skycell.066.stk.36184.unconv.jpg, 400px)]][[BR]]

* Finally, I'm testing ppSub with the templates selected [[BR]]

[[Image(MD02.skycell.102.stk.40977.unconv.dif.jpg, 400px)]][[BR]]

 [[BR]]

'''STEP 3'''[[BR]]

The choice of one night as template in each filter is in principle good, but for some skycells is not working:[[BR]]
For example: the a good r filter observation of MD03 is the one of JD=55207. It gives very good subtraction for some skycell
(eg skycell 066) but there are during the same night other skycell not useful (eg skycell 102). In that case I would suggest to use different night as template for different skycell. In Figure skycell 066 and 102 for 2 good nights. [[BR]]
[[Image(test_MD03.jpg, 400px)]][[BR]]


== '''Probably it will be necessary to select for different skycell, different nights (as template)''' ==

'''MD03'''[[BR]]
 
skycell.066  stack.42029  JD.55207 [[BR]]

skycell.090  stack.42052  JD.55207 [[BR]]

skycell.102  stack.39714  JD.55183 [[BR]]

skycell.043  stack.39693  JD.55183 [[BR]]

.........