m53 Number of visits: 12 cohort types: long, med, short faint H mag limits: 13.3 < H_raw < 13.8 Priority Levels (in descending order): hr2 : stars with existing high resolution spectroscopy rv2 : stars with radial velocity data indicating probable cluster membership rv3 : faint stars with radial velocity data indicating probable cluster membership segue2: SEGUE stars sqo2: W+D giants as selected using Nidever giant selection criteria and (J-K)_0 > 0.3 sqo3: faint W+D giants as selected using Nidever selection criteria, (J-K)_0 > 0.3, and the faint H magnitude limits (see above) sqo4: stars with no W+D data and (J-K)_0 > 0.5 sqo5: stars with no W+D data and 0.3 < (J-K)_0 < 0.5 sqo6: W+D dwarfs as selected using Nidever giant selection criteria and (J-K)_0 > 0.3 No targets were provided for these priority classes: proper motion >90% proper motion 50-90% Fiber Distributions: L1 106 M1 63 M2 42 S1 81 S2 81 S3 102 S4 102 class coh N_fibers hr2 long 3 hr2 med 5 hr2 short 9 rv2 long 0 rv2 med 1 rv2 short 1 rv3 long 2 rv3 med 0 rv3 short 0 segue2 long 0 segue2 med 10 segue2 short 6 sqo2 long 43 sqo2 med 23 sqo2 short 74 sqo3 long 29 sqo3 med 0 sqo3 short 0 sqo4 long 29 sqo4 med 28 sqo4 short 66 sqo5 long 0 sqo5 med 38 sqo5 short 94 sqo6 long 0 sqo6 med 0 sqo6 short 116 plate class coh N_fibers plate1 hr2 long 3 plate1 rv2 long 0 plate1 rv3 long 2 plate1 segue2 long 0 plate1 sqo2 long 43 plate1 sqo3 long 29 plate1 sqo4 long 29 plate1 sqo5 long 0 plate1 sqo6 long 0 plate1 hr2 med 5 plate1 rv2 med 1 plate1 rv3 med 0 plate1 segue2 med 10 plate1 sqo2 med 20 plate1 sqo3 med 0 plate1 sqo4 med 27 plate1 sqo5 med 0 plate1 sqo6 med 0 plate1 hr2 short 0 plate1 rv2 short 0 plate1 rv3 short 0 plate1 segue2 short 5 plate1 sqo2 short 0 plate1 sqo3 short 0 plate1 sqo4 short 65 plate1 sqo5 short 11 plate1 sqo6 short 0 plate2 hr2 long 3 plate2 rv2 long 0 plate2 rv3 long 2 plate2 segue2 long 0 plate2 sqo2 long 43 plate2 sqo3 long 29 plate2 sqo4 long 29 plate2 sqo5 long 0 plate2 sqo6 long 0 plate2 hr2 med 5 plate2 rv2 med 1 plate2 rv3 med 0 plate2 segue2 med 10 plate2 sqo2 med 20 plate2 sqo3 med 0 plate2 sqo4 med 27 plate2 sqo5 med 0 plate2 sqo6 med 0 plate2 hr2 short 0 plate2 rv2 short 0 plate2 rv3 short 0 plate2 segue2 short 0 plate2 sqo2 short 0 plate2 sqo3 short 0 plate2 sqo4 short 0 plate2 sqo5 short 80 plate2 sqo6 short 1 plate3 hr2 long 3 plate3 rv2 long 0 plate3 rv3 long 2 plate3 segue2 long 0 plate3 sqo2 long 43 plate3 sqo3 long 29 plate3 sqo4 long 29 plate3 sqo5 long 0 plate3 sqo6 long 0 plate3 hr2 med 0 plate3 rv2 med 0 plate3 rv3 med 0 plate3 segue2 med 0 plate3 sqo2 med 3 plate3 sqo3 med 0 plate3 sqo4 med 1 plate3 sqo5 med 38 plate3 sqo6 med 0 plate3 hr2 short 8 plate3 rv2 short 1 plate3 rv3 short 0 plate3 segue2 short 1 plate3 sqo2 short 71 plate3 sqo3 short 0 plate3 sqo4 short 1 plate3 sqo5 short 3 plate3 sqo6 short 17 plate4 hr2 long 3 plate4 rv2 long 0 plate4 rv3 long 2 plate4 segue2 long 0 plate4 sqo2 long 43 plate4 sqo3 long 29 plate4 sqo4 long 29 plate4 sqo5 long 0 plate4 sqo6 long 0 plate4 hr2 med 0 plate4 rv2 med 0 plate4 rv3 med 0 plate4 segue2 med 0 plate4 sqo2 med 3 plate4 sqo3 med 0 plate4 sqo4 med 1 plate4 sqo5 med 38 plate4 sqo6 med 0 plate4 hr2 short 1 plate4 rv2 short 0 plate4 rv3 short 0 plate4 segue2 short 0 plate4 sqo2 short 3 plate4 sqo3 short 0 plate4 sqo4 short 0 plate4 sqo5 short 0 plate4 sqo6 short 98 Notes: All targets with at1 flag 6 set (star selected with no dereddening) in target list should have at1 flag 4 set instead because these targets were selected using RJCE-WISE dereddening. Manually chose to NOT observe any short targets that were cluster members or giants on plates 1 & 2. One note on the M53 W+D data -- the photometry and giant/dwarf classifications given here actually come from two different "observations" that overlapped this field. In comparing the photometry (and dw/gi classes) for stars falling in both observations, I [Gail] found a great deal of discrepancy. Most of the differences, however, appear to be due to the fact that one of the observations has null values for many of the overlapping stars, and where both observations have non-null photometry, the values agree fairly closely (<~0.1 mag) in the mag range of our potential targets. So I was careful to include the "good" observation's data first and just use the other one's to fill in the other side of the field. Perhaps it's not ideal, but without a more careful analysis of the actual photometry (chi/sharp values, etc) and merging, I think it's as good as we can do. No color cut used for proper motion, RV, or SEGUE targets. Proper motion, RV, and SEGUE targets were not randomized. Used fiber jacket diameter of 70", which is too small to avoid all fiber collisions (need 71.5"). gc_target_m53.py Revision 128456