|
Thanks everyone for the replies.
I'm still struggling to see how comparing SQM readings is valid though. A sky quality meter can only gauge "how dark". It cannot tell you anything about those other factors that go into making one site better than another, even when they share the same SQM value. It can't, even by your own thinking Les. Instead, it can only give a false sense of security if one hasn't undertaken an appropriate and thorough site selection process. Worse is if your site selection process solely relies upon SQM readings. It means your site selection process is no better than just finding an open grassy field. By just comparing numbers is meaningless if the other factors that go into accessing an astro site are not also taken into consideration. An SQM reading may be objective, but it is mute as it assumes EVERY site is equal in sky transparency and every location has the exact same geographic and microclimate conditions with only artificial light as the one point in common. As one factor of many in investigating a potential astro site, yeah ok. As a tool by which to compare sites, no.
|