Zé Vinícius

@Cadair FYI: https://github.com/astropy/photutils/issues/345

@Gabriel-p might be something to do with the way that IRAF estimates the background level perhaps?

`flux_unc` is the uncertainty associated to the `flux` parameter in the PSF fit. This uncertainty is computed via a local approximation of the Fisher Information Matrix (returned by the optimizer)...

@eteq @bsipocz It absolutely makes sense! Let the user customize it as much as possible :) I will prioritize #471, and then I can come to this :)

Awesome, Erik!

I like that idea! What you all think @eteq @bsipocz @hamogu?

Hi @Gabriel-p, Currently, `DAOPhotPSFPhotometry` expects that the user knows _a priori_ the `fwhm` (or `sigma`) to initialize `psf_model`. `psf_model` usually is an astropy `Fittable2DModel` like [IntegratedGaussianPRF].(http://photutils.readthedocs.io/en/latest/api/photutils.IntegratedGaussianPRF.html) I'm pretty sure this...

@Gabriel-p `sigma` could be left as a parameter to be fitted. However, the results on the fitted `sigma` wouldn't show up in the output table of `DAOPhotPSFPhotometry` because the output...

Thank you for reporting, @ttshimiz I will take a look into that soon =)

@ttshimiz I don't have a quick solution for you right now, maybe ``PRFAdapter``, but it looks like it is a bit slow... Anyways, maybe adapting ``prepare_psf_model`` to play with the...