Re: Omega CMa comparison stars > It is important to say that one should be careful in using them, but I think > care must be taken in every estimate we make (see vsnet-chat 4199 and 4233). > Every time I estimate a variable, it's like estimating its comparisons since > I take the job of checking if everything is "okay". Using similar comparions > (eg= 3.82, 3.96, 4.20), any difference between them would be perceived and > .... and then I would send an alert !!!! I think that this is the best approach for visual photometry -- the use of an emsemble of stars when a set of comparison stars unavoidably include possible microvariables. The same situation is met in bright Cassiopeia variables in the northern hemisphere (almost all stars are suspected of variability). Nevertheless, 3 Pup deserves more attention because it's one of "prototype" stars of these high-luminosity peculiar stars. They may be variable in a large amplitude, and individual observations may be worth reporting even when the star is quiet. Regards, Taichi Kato