Geometric transformation:
There are no alterations with respect to Paper VII. The mean error was
or
in the sky.
Gradation curve and absolute calibration:
With the U and V passbands well inside the domain of sensitivity of the
respective emulsions, no problems were encountered during reduction, which
followed closely the procedures laid down in Paper VII. In the red spectral
region, however, the long wavelength cut-off of the passband coincided with
that of the 103-aF emulsion. At the limiting wavelengths of their sensitivity,
emulsions tend to steepen up their gradation curves. So special care had to be
taken to establish the true run of these curves.
Atmospheric effects:
While in the visual spectral region the effect of airglow is very much like
that in the B-band (Paper VII), in the red and ultraviolet spectral region the
airglow affects the Milky Way much more. This is due to the higher emission in
the red, and/or to the lower surface brightness of the Milky Way in the U-band.
Columns 3-5 of Table 2 (click here) give the airglow values for all plates. As
defined in Paper VII (Eqs. (8) and (9)), IA0 is the zenith brightness in
S10 units, while C2 is connected directly to the mean altitude of the
airglow layer
and determines its variation with respect
to zenith distance z.
Zodiacal light:
The corrections were made using the data published by
Levasseur-Regourd &
Dumont (1980). The transformations into the respective passbands were done by
multiplying these data with the appropriate solar intensity ratio.
Elimination of foreground stars and averaging of
individual plates:
The procedures of elimination and averaging were the same as in Paper VII. When
the photometries were combined to U-B, B-V, V-R maps (B
from Paper VII), a
few small areas of "astrophysically impossible" colours showed up, which are
thought to result from inadequately eliminated stars or star clusters. In Table
3 (click here) data obtained from a composite picture of
Hovest (1995) contains
the positions of the areas (Fig. 5 (click here)), where our photometries have
to be treated with caution.
| gal. | gal. | Object | not totally |
| longitude | latitude | eliminated in | |
| l | b | Photometry | |
| | Jupiter | B | |
|
| | | V |
|
| | | V |
|
| | IC 2602 in Carina | B*), V |
|
| | | B, V |
Errors and comparisons with other photometries:
As in Paper VII, the three photometries are compared to others available. In
Table 4 (click here) the relations are presented. The comparison for the B band
photometry is taken from Paper VII. Except for the early work of
Elsässer &
Haug (1960) all relations stay within
in scale. It seems probable,
however, that our scale is correct within
.
| U | LR | | |
| P | | ||
| PM | | ||
| S | | ||
| B | C | | |
| M | | ||
| S | | ||
| LR | | ||
| To | =0.90 K+24 | ||
| V | D | =1.03H | |
| LR | =0.94H | ||
| EH | | ||
| S | | ||
| R | S | |
All values in S10 units;
photometries: C (Classen 1976), D
(Dachs 1970), EH
(Elsässer & Haug
1960), H
(Hoffmann et al. 1990, 1993), M
(Mattila 1973), LR
(Leinert &
Richter 1981), P
(Pröll et al. 1980), PM
(Pfleiderer & Mayer 1971), S
(Seidensticker et al. 1982), T
(Tappert et al. 1993), To
(Toller 1989).