Congrats to Dave Grennan on his SN discovery.

You were using an R filter? Must've brightened lot then. I took images the other night which I must process...

dmcdona wrote:

You were using an R filter? Must've brightened lot then. I took images the other night which I must process...

Hi Dave,

I didn't use any filters for this measurement.

Carl.

carlobeirnes wrote:

I didn't use any filters for this measurement.

I saw the R at the end of the one-liner and thought that's what you'd done... Sorry.

I didn't use any filters for this measurement.

Take the R out of your MPC observations Carl since some people will use the R data and get skewed results. I used to put C for no filter but now you just leave out the letter for no filter.

If you use fitsblink to check residuals leave in the filter letter otherwise it does not work.

phoenix wrote:

I didn't use any filters for this measurement.

Take the R out of your MPC observations Carl since some people will use the R data and get skewed results. I used to put C for no filter but now you just leave out the letter for no filter.

If you use fitsblink to check residuals leave in the filter letter otherwise it does not work.

Kieran,

Be careful, You cannot use C any more it has been defunct for a couple of months now. There is no specific code for unfiltered or clear filters any more. I note that all the regular observers are now using R (and this is what is being recommended on MPML) when unfiltered or clear filter magnitudes are being reported. I am thinking of getting a V filter as V is still valid, but should not be used for unfiltered estimates.

Dave.

I forgot to add the reason why the 'C' filter was removed. It is a common misconception that the filter code refers to the filter you used for the observation. It does not. It refers to the bandpass of the filter used for the reference star catalog used for the magnitude estimate. Since there are no catalogs which use a C filter it was removed. If you send in observations with C they will be rejected.

Dave.