Re: Lux

• Previous message: JAY RESPLER: "Re: TDF 2, plus an unexpected obs"
• In reply to: Tom Wagner: "Lux"
• Next in thread: Bjorn Gimle: "Re: Lux"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

A web search on +lux +magnitude at www.evreka.com gave this:

En comparant les éclats du soleil et d'un étalon de laboratoire, puis ceux
du soleil et d'une étoile, on peut ramener toute magnitude visuelle à un
éclairement E exprimé en lux au moyen de la relation suivante: log E(lux)
= -0,4×(m + 14,2).

I believe the Sun is -26.7; this gives exactly 100000 lux.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Wagner" <sciteach1950@home.com>
To: "Astronomy-eGroup" <astronomer@yahoogroups.com>
Cc: <Shoot-for-the-Stars@yahoogroups.com>; "SeeSat"
<SeeSat-L@blackadder.lmsal.com>
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2002 1:53 AM
Subject: Lux


> Anybody know of a way of mathematically comparing visible magnitude with
the
> lux, a unit that is used to describe the minimum amount light that video
> cameras are sensitive to?
>
> Always looking up,
>
> Iowa Tom
> USA
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> Unsubscribe from SeeSat-L by sending a message with 'unsubscribe'
> in the SUBJECT to SeeSat-L-request@lists.satellite.eu.org
> http://www.satellite.eu.org/seesat/seesatindex.html
>
>

• Next message: Bjorn Gimle: "Re: Lux"
• Previous message: JAY RESPLER: "Re: TDF 2, plus an unexpected obs"
• In reply to: Tom Wagner: "Lux"
• Next in thread: Bjorn Gimle: "Re: Lux"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jan 28 2002 - 05:37:22 EST