Final Project - Use FanCam to obtain data with which you can make an
evaluation of the most time-efficient way to obtain infrared imaging
data in the J and K bands.

Step 1 is to go to Fan as a group and collect data in the 
J (1.2um) and Ks (2.2um) bands on two targets.

  - First, a moderately dense star field - NGC 2420 (a star cluster)
    might be ideal for this.

  - Second, a fuzzy object.  Anything with Messier in the name
    should do.

In each band acquire 12 30-second spatially dithered frames on target
and 12 more 30-second spatially dithered frames off target nearby.

Also get there early enough to acquire flat fields and dark frames.



The question at hand is whether it is better to reduce Fan IR data
like classical CCD data...   (frame - dark) / (flat - dark)  or
should we stick to standard IR techniques  
          (frame - median_sky) / (flat - dark)

The CCD technique has the advantage that all data is taken on target
and the S/N per unit time should be better but has the disadvantage
that it does not automaticaly account for the un-natural illumination
of the array from thermal sources or from scattered airglow.

The infrared median sky subtraction is done to
remove thermal contamination of the frame illumination (i.e. a pattern
in the frame background that does not originate from the sky) in the
infrared.  Without this correction the variations in background may
degrade the S/N of the photometry.   The cost of doing this correction
is that you spend 1/2 of your time looking at nothing to measure the
frame illumination (sometimes you can get away with generating the
median sky with your on-source data, but we will assume that is not
the case here).

So the simple question is, for point sources, can standard CCD
techniques deliver better S/N at J and/or K-band.  Note that airglow
dominates J-band background just as in V,R, or I, but that thermal
background dominates K-band background - thus the motivation for doing
both bands for this project.  I'm expecting you'll have different
conclusions depending on band.

The interpretation of the extended source observations will have to
be more qualitative (the answer could be quantitative, but I expect
it would require a lot of painful isophotal analysis, so I'm
happy with qualitative).