Finally upgraded and trying out the new WBPP 2.1.
SET-TEMP is a fits header that now, with dash support, works, so my files come up with -10.0
I have some library items without anything in the header for SET-TEMP, so I renamed them to have SET-TEMP_-10.0_ in the name (and other temps of course).
These come up as -10 (no decimal .0).
WBPP then doesn't match these up because of the trailing decimal-zero.
Is WBPP supposed to ignore decimal points? I'm guessing it does due to the file "type" conventions.
Also, and maybe I just missed something -- previously I thought a file starting with FLAT was presumed to be, well, a FLAT. When I loaded them they ended up as LIGHTS? I can force them easily to flats so no big deal, but ...?
The real killer for me is the -10 vs -10.0 as I don't see an easy way to mass-change file headers (I could put them in there instead of the name). Is there a trick, for example to say "this is a numeric field treat it as such"?
SET-TEMP is a fits header that now, with dash support, works, so my files come up with -10.0
I have some library items without anything in the header for SET-TEMP, so I renamed them to have SET-TEMP_-10.0_ in the name (and other temps of course).
These come up as -10 (no decimal .0).
WBPP then doesn't match these up because of the trailing decimal-zero.
Is WBPP supposed to ignore decimal points? I'm guessing it does due to the file "type" conventions.
Also, and maybe I just missed something -- previously I thought a file starting with FLAT was presumed to be, well, a FLAT. When I loaded them they ended up as LIGHTS? I can force them easily to flats so no big deal, but ...?
The real killer for me is the -10 vs -10.0 as I don't see an easy way to mass-change file headers (I could put them in there instead of the name). Is there a trick, for example to say "this is a numeric field treat it as such"?