META TOPICPARENT 
name="StewartBoogertPhotometry2017" 
Fixed error in the star simulation  were getting pixel values way bigger than 65,000. This was because of the Stot distribution used.
Last week, I used the scipy.skewnorm to vary Stot. Instead, I've made a function so I can use it to fit to the profiles of stars.
This was then used to fit the data taken from the real stars.
However, the sigma seems to be too big, not representative of what was gotten with the unskewed fit. The sigma here is actually xi, so the difference originates from there.
 BekiChafer  08 Dec 2017
META FILEATTACHMENT 
attachment="SkewedGaussianFunction.png" attr="" comment="Example of Skewed Gaussian Function" date="1512699309" name="SkewedGaussianFunction.png" path="SkewedGaussianFunction.png" size="70848" user="zavc984" version="1" 
META FILEATTACHMENT 
attachment="Skewed_gaussian.PNG" attr="" comment="Function used for skewed gaussian" date="1512699348" name="Skewed_gaussian.PNG" path="Skewed gaussian.PNG" size="20947" user="zavc984" version="1" 
META FILEATTACHMENT 
attachment="Skewed_Gaussian_Fit_to_Real_Stars.png" attr="" comment="Skewed Gaussian Fit to real data" date="1512699378" name="Skewed_Gaussian_Fit_to_Real_Stars.png" path="Skewed Gaussian Fit to Real Stars.png" size="46027" user="zavc984" version="1" 
META FILEATTACHMENT 
attachment="BothFitsonrealstars.png" attr="" comment="Gaussian and skewed gaussian on one graph" date="1512699455" name="BothFitsonrealstars.png" path="BothFitsonrealstars.png" size="62211" user="zavc984" version="1" 
