Re: fov

[Tom Droege <tdroege@veriomail.com>]

jamie and other fans of Disk 16,

Yes, I believe you have the orientation correct.  The proof is always 
matching to a star field.  This is start up data, and until everything has 
been running a while, there is always the chance that a camera will be 
mounted upside down or some such thing and change the orientation.  The 
images are roughly 4 x 4 degrees.

I think the disk16.txt file explains the exposure sequence as well as I 
can.  All exposures were made by the same sequence, a dark followed by 9 
ea.  50 second exposures of the same section of sky.  But Disk16 is only a 
fraction of the data.  There are two complete ten exposure sequences, then 
a bunch more images selected from the third frame of other ten exposure 
sequences.  This with the idea that one needs a bunch of images of 
different parts of the sky to make a good flat.  To sort out the data one 
has to look at the lists in the .txt file.

Tom Droege

At 09:51 AM 11/5/00 -0500, you wrote:

>tom
>
>for the images on disk16, i am assuming north is again to the right and
>east is up . . . how many degrees do the images cover ?
>
>why did you choose incremental changes in the early images at 5.59 degree
>steps while the 2 10 exposure series are in 0.53 degree steps ?
>
>have a good day
>
>jamie