4.2 Article

On the optimal calibration of VVV photometry

Journal

EXPERIMENTAL ASTRONOMY
Volume 49, Issue 3, Pages 217-238

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10686-020-09661-0

Keywords

Photometric calibration; Near-infrared photometry; VISTA; Photometric zero points

Funding

  1. FONDECYT [1171273]
  2. Ministry for the Economy, Development, and Tourism's Millennium Science Initiative [IC120009]
  3. Proyecto Basal [AFP-170002]
  4. German Research Foundation (DFG Project) [Sonderforschungsbereich SFB 881, 138713538]
  5. European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme [695099]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Prompted by some inconsistencies in the photometry of the VISTA Variables in the Via Lactea (VVV) survey, we conduct a revision of the standard calibration procedure of VISTA data in theJ,H, andK(S)passbands. Two independent sources of bias in the photometric zero-points are identified: First, high sky backgrounds severely affect theH-band measurements, but this can mostly be minimized by strict data vetting. Secondly, during the zero-point calibration, stars serving as standards are taken from the 2MASS catalog, which can suffer from high degrees of blending in regions of high stellar density, affecting both the absolute photometric calibration, as well as the scatter of repeated observations. The former affects studies that rely on an absolute magnitude scale, while the latter can also affect the shapes and amount of scatter in the VVV light curves, thus potentially hampering their proper classification. We show that these errors can be effectively eliminated by relatively simple modifications of the standard calibration procedure, and demonstrate the effect of the recalibration on the VVV survey's data quality. We give recommendations for future improvements of the pipeline calibration of VISTA photometry, while also providing preliminary corrections to the VVVJHK(S)observations as a temporary measure.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available