Re: NSOG Survey (was: Re: The one true H400 variant)

From: Steve Gottlieb (sgottlieb@No-Spam)
Date: Thu Dec 20 2001 - 15:15:59 MST

  • Next message: William G. Schultz: "Re: Friday Night Observing, Ranger Notification at Coe?"

    on 12/20/01 10:26 AM, Peter Natscher at natscher@No-Spam wrote:

    > I'm finding in my cross references on galaxies to be obseved that there are
    > notable differences in magnitude assignments of specific galaxies I plan to
    > observe. This includes the references of SA2000, The Sky, and Uranometria
    > which I use. Some magnitude designations per galaxy differ by 2 mags. So, in
    > looking for new galaxies, I've been surprised in what to expect for their
    > visibility level--some were brighter than expected while others which I
    > thought I could see were not there at all.

    Most of the magnitudes from older sources (except for the brighter stuff)
    were based on photographic (blue-sensitive) plates in the late '50's and
    '60's and are not visual magnitudes. As a general rule, these are roughly a
    magnitude fainter than a true V magnitude. To further muck up the
    situation, many of the fainter magnitudes came are very rough --
    particularly those from as the MCG (Morphological Catalogue of Galaxies) and
    can be off by two magnitudes!

    Still, these older photographic magnitudes (generally based on the POSS)
    were "modified" slightly to convert to a standard B magnitude and are given
    in the PGC. Unfortunately, the PGC is the catalogue source for many of the
    popular charting software such as TheSky and MegaStar! Some of the recent
    lists (such as my Orion DeepMap and the new Deep Sky Field Guide) give
    visual magnitudes, so these will differ quite a bit as you noted from
    TheSky!

    Steve Gottlieb



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Dec 20 2001 - 15:12:04 MST


    The Astronomy Connection -- Mailing List Archives