[fitswcs] Complex values in FITS {External}

[peter teuben]

I think you are misreading.   Tricky 0-based vs. 1-based?

    In this example pixel 0 (FITS convention, which is just outside the 
grid) has value 0, pixel 1 , the first one, has value 1 and pixel 2 is 2.

On 2/15/23 09:46, Patrick Leahy via fitswcs wrote:
>
> Hi Folks,
>
>                 Not sure if this is the right list, but there is 
> currently a discussion going on about the right way to store Faraday 
> synthesis spectra and spectral cubes, which are complex-valued. One 
> way is to use a COMPLEX axis as discussed in WCS paper I (and the 
> original FITS papers).  But there seems to be a long-standing 
> inconsistency in the FITS standard on this point. All references agree 
> that COMPLEX value 1 is real and 2 is complex. But the example of this 
> in the standard, Table 28, is:
>
> SIMPLE=T
>
> BITPIX=32
>
> NAXIS=2
>
> NAXIS1=2
>
> NAXIS2=100
>
> CTYPE1='COMPLEX'
>
> CRVAL1=0.
>
> CRPIX1=0.
>
> CDELT1=1.
>
> END
>
> Here the complex axis runs from 0 to 1, not 1 to 2 as expected. Is 
> this a mistake or am I misreading?
>
> Regards,
>
>                                 Paddy Leahy
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> fitswcs mailing list
> fitswcs at listmgr.nrao.edu
> https://listmgr.nrao.edu/mailman/listinfo/fitswcs
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listmgr.nrao.edu/pipermail/fitswcs/attachments/20230215/4bc451aa/attachment-0001.html>