Return to Home Page
Re: (fwd) to V or not to V - I couldn't resist it > That may be the reason the AAVSO has that "CCDO" magnitude-type. :-) To my eyes, the standard Rc filter (tuned for our CCD) looks orange :-) > One cannot invent a > type-code that handles them all; something that handles, say, 95percent > of all amateur submissions is a reasonable goal. I think a combination > of the "CV,CR" unfiltered set plus "UBVRI" for the filtered folks > probably does that. If you want to differentiate between Rj/Ij and > Rc/Ic, that also makes sense. This is very reasonable. I bet more than half of broadband photometrists will agree. (There would be some applications, although not so many in amateur photometry, for Stroemgren ones -- these codes would better be reserved for their own use). Regarding standardization of a special (or a new) system, we need to be aware of the rapid change in commercial CCDs. For small telescopes, we started with ST-6, then ST-7, and ST-7E, and now all of them are more or less old-fashioned now. I don't think that the currently available lot of CCDs will be still available after ten years. Detector-specific systems would be ideal in pursuit of intrenal precision, but they will not likely endure for a long time. Resorting to the best-established, and well-reproducible systems is probably a best choice for selecting photometric systems, unless you are trying all your life to make revolutionary efforts. Regards, Taichi Kato
Return to the Daisaku Nogami
vsnet-adm@kusastro.kyoto-u.ac.jp
