Re: Data sets over time

[tom <tdroege2@earthlink.net>]

Robert,

One more thing.  It is one of my projects to make just such data sets.  I will 
need some software, possibly trivial for you but not so for me.  The software 
needed would read disks full of images and look at the fits headers.  Then it 
would load the fits images in such a way that one could select the type of 
data set you desire. 

It is always a big project to go through even one camera.  However, if it were 
all set up I could just load disks when prompted and could get through my 
stash in a couple of weeks.  

The three telescope systems cover different areas of the sky.  TOM1 covers -6 
to +18, TOM2 +18 to +50, TOM3 +50 to +90.  I could set up enough storage on 
one computer and load the disks from one camera, about 700 or so.  

TOM1 does overlap ASAS, don't know where OGLE is pointing.

Tom 

On Wednesday 15 September 2004 07:28 am, you wrote:
> Tom,
>
> How difficult would it be for you to put together one
> or a few CDs (more than a few CDs I could not handle
> currently) of a specific region of sky on an extended
> time basis?  I.e. months (years?) of observations of
> just a single (or a few) frames with approx. the same
> position?
>
> Also, for general analysis purposes it might be
> interesting to be able to construct such a
> time referenced data set with several points
> of view.  I can think of perhaps 6 though I'm
> not sure you can capture them all.
> a) Directly towards the galactic center;
> b) Directly away from the galactic center;
> c) Directly forward of the sun's orbit around
>    the galactic center;
> d) Directly aft of the sun's orbit around the
>    galactic center;
> e) A view above the galactic bulge;
> f) A view below the galactic bulge.
>
> In particular, (e/f) may overlap with the OGLE III
> observations (though it is taking pictures from Chile
> and it isn't clear to me how much overlap may be available).
>
> This might feedback into the question as to whether
> the pipeline analysis needs to be adjusted by general
> background (star density, dust density, etc.).
>
> Thanks,
> Robert