![]() | ![]() |
Astron. Astrophys. 327, 1004-1016 (1997) Appendix A: image reduction and analysisThe images were reduced using the standard algorithms of bias subtraction, flat fielding and trimming of the overscan, without encountering particular problems. The stellar photometry was done using DAOPHOT II and ALLSTAR (Stetson 1987) The second version of DAOPHOT was particularly useful for the image analysis since we were forced to use a variable point spread function (PSF) through the images. In fact, the stellar images of the EMMI Red Arm together with the F/2.5 field camera presented coma aberration at the edges of the field: the resulting PSF was radially elongated. To better interpolate the PSF we also used an analytic function with 5 free parameters (i.e. the Penny function of DAOPHOT II). In order to obtain a single CMD for all the stars found in the 18
fields we first obtained the CMD of each field matching the V
and I photometry. Then, we combined all the CMDs using the relative
zero points determined from the overlapping regions of adjacent
fields. All the CMDs were connected to the main CMD, one at a time,
following a sequence aimed at maximizing the number of common stars
usable for the zero point calculation. The central field CMD was used
as the starting point of the combination. For the outer fields we used
a minimum of 20 common stars while for the inner fields we had at
least 300 stars. The mean error of the zero points was
In order to perform the photometry of the central field of the
cluster, we divided it into 4 subimages of Appendix B: calibration of the photometryIn principle, the analysis of the radial density profile does not
require calibrated photometry. But this operation is necessary if we
want to analyze the stellar population of the cluster, together with
its stellar luminosity and mass functions. Since we could not use
standards taken during the same night, we have performed a relative
calibration using existing photometry of M 55. For the V
magnitude we linked our data to Piotto's (1994) un published
photometry of the central field of M 55 from images taken with
the 2.2 m ESO telescope. For the (V-I) we calibrated our data
against Alcaino et al. (1992) photometry. They published a CCD BVRI
photometry for two different non-overlapping fields outside the center
of M 55, named FA and FB, with dimensions of
Before the publication of the I-band photometry by Mandushev et al.
(1996), the one by Alcaino et al. (1992) was the only photometry in
the literature. Unfortunately, the M 55 data set of Mandushev et
al. (1996) does not overlap with any of our fields: it is centered
just few arcmin south of our field 2. In Fig. 13, we show the
difference between our data and those of Alcaino et al. (1992). In
this case, the two zero points calculated for Alcaino's fields differ
by a significant amount. We do not know the origin of this
discrepancy, which we believe is internal to the data of Alcaino et
al. (1992). They could not resolve this due to the fact that fields FA
and FB do not have stars in common. We believe that the problem is not
in our data since both Alcaino's fields are contained in the same
subimage of the central field. Lacking other independent (V-I)
calibrations, we are forced to adopt as our color zero point the mean
of the two values of FA and FB: Appendix C: crowding experimentsFor each field, we performed a series of Monte Carlo simulations in order to establish the magnitude limit and the degree of completeness of the CMD. The magnitude limit has been defined as the level at which the completeness function reach a value of 0.5, V(50%). This value is reported in Table 1 for each field. The procedure followed to generate the artificial stars for the
crowding experiments is the standard one Piotto et al. (1990b). The
completeness function used to correct our data is the combination of
the results of the experiments in both the V and I
images for each field. In the outer fields the stars were added at
random positions in a magnitude range starting from
The completeness function has been calculated for each field taking into account the results of the two different experiments in V and I. As an example in Fig. 15 we show the completeness functions for field number 3 (top) and 19 (bottom). The results of the experiments were fitted using the error function:
© European Southern Observatory (ESO) 1997 Online publication: April 6, 1998 ![]() |