"Cousin Ricky" <rickysttATyahooDOTcom> wrote:
> Christian Froeschlin <chr### [at] chrfrde> wrote:
> > For precise temperature determination a spectrum is better.
> > But B-V can be determined easily for thousands of stars at once, even
> > faint ones a thus yields large datasets for statistical analysis.
>
> If I had a spectrum, I could go directly to color; I wouldn't need temperature
> as a proxy.
>
> However, aside from full spectral data being less available, I'm not sure it
> would get me better results for ray tracing purposes, as it would disregard the
> interstellar extinction effects.
>
> A direct spectrum would be best if I were doing a portrait of a single star.  It
> would also get me accurate colors for carbon stars, which, you might remember
> from an earlier post, turned out hot pink when I used a B-V-to-temperature
> correlation.

Star spectrum...Do you mean the black-body radiation?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck%27s_law

Post a reply to this message