Influence of Illumination Parameters on Night Sky Observation in Rural Areas
, Adrián Bocho-Roas 1, Diego Carmona-Fernández 2,*, Manuel Calderón-Godoy 2, Miguel Ángel Jaramillo-Morán 2 and Juan Félix González 1
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear Editor
After detailed readings in the manuscript, entitled: "Influence of illumination parameters on night sky observation in rural areas" I suggest ACCEPT the manuscript with minor corrections:
1 - At the end of the Abstract, you must make clear the importance of your study at a global level.
2 - The end of the introduction should highlight the importance, together with the impact that the study represents for society, considering large regions.
3 - The methodology is very detailed, clear and objective. The authors did a good job.
4 - I suggest improving the gratification of the figures, many look faded.
5 - I know it's a new and innovative topic. But further discussion of the results is needed. I suggest using more authors to complement your results, which would increase your coverage and discussion.
6 - The English used is correct, congratulations to the authors.
7 - It is necessary to point out the possibility of future works in the conclusion.
The English used is correct, congratulations to the authors.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
In this study, the evaluation method of light pollution was measured in the field, a large number of experimental data were obtained, and the prediction model was established according to the evaluation parameters. The research aims and ideas are clear, providing basic data for controlling light pollution and illumination threshold, but there are still some problems that need to be modified and supplemented.
1. In Figure A5, two luminaires of 30W and 60W are used, with luminous fluxes of 4800lm and 7200lm respectively. Luminous flux is not proportional to wattage, 90W is 12,000 lm for both lamps combined, so it is not normative to use the wattage of the luminaire as a study parameter. Two luminaires, even if they are of the same wattage, produce different luminous fluxes if they have different luminous efficacies, so it is more appropriate to use luminous flux modelling. If re-modelling is not possible, the limitations of this study should be stated in the discussion section.
2. Both the summary and the conclusion mention that the guidelines can be applied to lighting design, the statements are simple and need to be discussed in detail to examine the value of the application of the model in Discussion.
3、The conclusion does not specify which software tool is used for lighting optimization, which needs to be supplemented.
4、Figures 2 and 19 are not in the same style as the others and are recommended to be redrawn.
Good English presentation and clear writing. Statements in the results and discussion sections can be simplified with more concise statements.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
In this study, it examines the Influence of illumination parameters on night sky observation in rural areas. This study is innovative and I recommend that this manuscript is suitable for publication. It is necessary for the authors of the study to apply the following comments in the study.
- In lines 99 to 105 and Figure 2, in addition to explaining unit mag/arcsec2, it should be explained about the vertical axis of the figure(skyglow weighting factor), and what is the use of skyglow weighting factor.
- Lines 99 to 105 are unclear to explain Figure 2, please correct it. Explain about 123 in the text
- In line 109, what do you mean by other factors, state these factors and give more details about how to control them.
- Lines 121 to 124 are generalizations, please explain in more detail.
- For example, the brightness was evaluated with what device and how in the scotopic environment. Or the relative path of the moon?
- Line 155 to 158, what type of photometer was used?
- Line 167, give complete information about the qualitative characteristics of lighting of light sources. For example, color temperature, color rendering index. Did all light sources have the same color temperature and color rendering index?
- Lines 195 to 196, how was the measurement of the moon's illuminance evaluated? Did the Oculus All Sky camera device measure the illuminance of the moon in addition to imaging?
- Lines 213 to 218, characteristic of the shield? Color, reflection coefficient? Why are shields of this color used? Should these items be stated in the manuscript?
- Figure 16, 17, 18 in the vertical axis, as it is explained in the text of the manuscript, it is not possible to express the complete phrase.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
This Study Aims to quantified the level of interference of lighting parameters in the night sky. The influence of other environ-mental factors which may interfere with observation was also evaluated. A predictive model was developed to determine the level of darkness in rural areas. It was concluded that the distance from the emission point to the observation site is critical for sky observation.
The main manuscript idea represents a significant scientific contribution, however, subject some clarifications and improvements must be made because the information is often disorganized or is absent. For example, the characteristics of the used lamps are not indicated, which is a key parameter. The main conclusion is essential and discussion and results are mixed. The information is disordered, model parameters must be defined clearly and the results presented in graphics are incomplete, The information in the graphs can be displayed in a clear or unified way according with diverse situations.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 4 Report
Correct language (p.18)
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
the translation error has been corrected in the final version of the manuscript.
Thank you for your help.
