Re: [TASS] photometric vs. non-photometric

[Herbert R Johnson <hjohnson@PLUTO.NJCC.COM>]

On         Fri, 3 Sep 1999 22:33:40 GMT, Andrew Bennett <andrew.bennett@NS.SYMPATICO.CA> wrote:
*>On Fri, 3 Sep 1999 09:52:28 -0400, Herbert R Johnson,
*><hjohnson@pluto.njcc.com>  wrote:
*>
*>>... The accumulated Mark III
*>>datasets offer an interesting opportunity for some QUANTATIVE considerations.
*>>I myself don't think this will be "solved" in an email exchange: it will
*>>take some homework.

*>And, I think, like much else that ought to be done,
*>knowledge of what raw data sets there were and preferably
*>access to the raw data. Otherwise one knows nothing about
*>what somebody decided to throw away. A lot of the gaps in
*>tenxcat are like this: was a star below some limiting
*>magnitude (oops - I mean above; you optical types measure
*>backwards) or was it not measured. It makes a big difference
*>to the statistics.
*>
*>Andrew Bennett, Avondale Vineyard, Nova Scotia, Canada.

I'd be glad to add or reference that information in my recent Mark III
Tech Note, as such information is forwarded to me. I'd say in general
that Mark III sites appear to reject any images when they are not terribly
"productive" after initial processing. That's about all I know.

Herb Johnson

Herbert R. Johnson              http://pluto.njcc.com/~hjohnson
hjohnson@pluto.njcc.com         voice 609-771-1503, New Jersey USA
             amateur astronomer and astro-tour guide
     S-100 computer restoration, parts, manuals as "Dr. S-100"
   rebuilder/reseller of compact Macs for your computing pleasure