3
$\begingroup$

I have already read this question about the difference between disk-integrated and disk-resolved photometry. But what exactly is the difference between disk-resolved and disk-averaged photometry? I am referring to tables 3 and 4 here, where they show disk-averaged parameters for the hapke model and disk-resolved parameters.

EDIT: I understand that disk-resolved photometry has a higher resolution whereas disk-integrated is somehow averaged - but I do not understand what disk-averaged means - is it a synonym to disk-integrated?

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Hi! What is exactly that you do not understand in the answer to the question you linked? If you edit this information into the question, someone that wants to answer it can go straight to the point $\endgroup$
    – Prallax
    Aug 29 at 16:23
  • $\begingroup$ @Prallax Thanks, I edited the question. $\endgroup$
    – lazerlini
    Aug 30 at 5:04
3
$\begingroup$

It's the same, but not:

Disk-integrated is used when the object is not resolved. Disk-averaged photometry tries to obtain the same data as disk-integrated by averaging over spatially-resolved data.

The paper dedicates the whole paragraph §3.2 in explaining what they do when they say "disk avaraged photometry": take the information from all pixels in the narrow view camera where the captured intensity exceeds a certain threshold and average the information (thus some tiny piece of information at the fringes is left-out). They do use some of the very same images to do disk-resolved photometry, taking into account rotation state, time and shape model.

They use disk-integrated photometry during the first stages of the approach when taking images with the wide-angle camera which are not yet over-exposed when still at a distance to 67/P.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.