Imagers are not Astronomers or are they.

[adamsp123]

oops

[adamsp123]

Do Professional Astronomers ever look through an Eyepiece?

If they don't, then those that do - aren't??

[Ant]

For me moving over the dark side was a necessity... when all you can see in the sky is akin to an orange hi-viz jacket there is very little point in getting the scope out.

About 5 years ago I gave in and upgraded from a HEQ5 to a HEQ5Pro because it was not possible to find anything at all looking through the scope.

Not long after that even having something found for me and in the FOV still didn't guarantee being able to see it.. so really for some it's imaging or nothing!

Shortly (in less than three weeks) I move to a nice dark location and I am hoping that this will rekindle the visual side of astronomy for me.

Ant

[travellerinthedark]

surely all simply stargazers

big dark sky with stars the welcoming open play ground to all, come as you are, with what you like, enough room for everyone

[astroimpulse]

I sit with my scope while imaging to keep it company and make sure I catch the inevitable crashes. When I build an obs I'll have a warm room but I'll be there, still. Not one for sitting indoors while it's working but each to their own and I understand it.

However, although I'm imaging I feel completely and utterly connected to the skies. I sit there, in the quiet, in the dark, leaning back and eyeballing the whole vista.

I'm constantly monitoring the weather, clouds, temp etc and then being blown away when a sub comes up. I'm aware of the wildlife around me and aware of utter splendor of nature.

I don't regard myself as an astronomer but I'm most definitely a friend of the sky and the universe...and they're grateful for it...I think

[callisto]

Chill out and enjoy everyone ..

[astro mick]

Hi Everyone.

I thought it would create a good response.

I think it was Matt who suggested i should stop imaging for two weeks,and return to visual.The trouble is i proberbly wont,i am hooked on this Imaging lark as well.

[lukebl]

....i am hooked on this Imaging lark as well.

...Give in to your anger. You know you want to and don't feel guilty about it!

[JamesF]

I couldn't care less what people call me, or what I do. I just enjoy doing it. When I started I had a bit of DSO thing going for a while. Now I'm doing a bit of planetary imaging because I find it a challenge. If we get some decent nights for viewing the moon then I'll do spend some visual and imaging time on that. Once I've got an obsy built I might do some DSO imaging. Then there are the solar possibilities, and the comet later this year, the last few shuttle missions and so on, not to mention getting the kids to really see the stuff they learn about at school or from books and television. Call it what you like. What matters is the kick you get out of it.

James

[FraserClarke]

(to be read with a slight wink in the eye...)

Well as someone who has made a living being a professional astronomer for the past 15 years -- I'd be pretty miffed if someone came along now and told me I wasn't an astronomer because I don't look through an eyepiece

I'll put the argument that the reason many people image rather than look visually (and it's certainly true for professionals) is that cameras are stupendously more sensitive than the human eye, and let you see a lot more of the night sky. If that somehow detracts from doing "astronomy" then by the same measure you shouldn't be allowed to have a telescope, because the whole point of telescopes is to help you see more too.

And what about people who like to do spectroscopy? Arguably they are understanding objects more than anyone who ever just looked at one -- and they don't *even* take a picture!

PS -- I am one of the rare professional astronomers who does occassionally look through an eyepiece, does occassionally stand outside a professional observatory using an 8-inch dob whilst taking spectra on an 8-meter telescope inside, and can tell you where Saturn is

[sbooder]

I am an observer, I like being at the EP and do little imaging if any really, but I don't regard imagers as not AAs. Each to their own I suppose, but if you feel you are missing what you see at the EP, then there is only one answer really...get you face to the scope again!

[barkis]

The Ancient Astronomers had little in the way of equipment to enhance their observing. They managed well with their naked eye, but their skies had no pollution, other than than the natural intrusions.

They managed to do a decent job without many aids to help them.

The progress to optical aids was slow but sure, and I don't suppose anyone objected to it, or considered it detrimental. On the contrary, they welcomed the progress. The marriage of visual and photographic astronomy was as natural as the introduction of the first telescope, and to my mind, nobody should have a problem with either, or both. Astronomy with a camera, is as valid as with a telescope. Even moreso, when the two are combined in the pursuit of knowledge, and of course, science.

Ron.

[the_laughing_crow]

Id say most people working in the academic sphere are more physicists and cosmologists than astronomers. Not at all being snide... I just think that at some point there is a line.... and running statistical analyses of data populations from an "instrument" youve never seen.... is definitely on the other side of that line.

Dont get me wrong... 85% of my enjoyment of astronomy stems from the understanding derived from the physics and cosmology.... but for me, astronomy is the act of looking at the night sky (or imaging it).

But I suppose "that line" is fairly blurred.... and is all semantics anyway. Maybe just being engaged with what's up there makes you an astronomer. (as long as its not astrology!!)

[astro mick]

I do not wish to upset people who may have a short fuse,but remember the question,i did not say that imagers are,nt Astronomers,i simply asked a question.

There is a difference.

Mick.

[astroimpulse]

Nobody's getting upset bud. Good question in my humble opinion *thumbs up*

[callump]

Wikipedia defines an astronomer as:

"An astronomer is a scientist who studies celestial bodies such as planets, stars and galaxies."

which is a pretty good definition to my mind...

/callump

[meteoriot]

I haven't read all the posts on here so sorry if i repeat something but I can't see any reason why an astronomer who takes pictures is any less of an astronomer or why a photographer is any less of a photographer because of the subject matter they choose. I suppose it depends on your motives. For example if a wildlife expert goes around the world taking pictures of animals that wouldn't mean they are no longer a wildlife expert. But if a photographer chooses wildlife for a subject then that doesn't mean they are a wildlife expert.

[meteoriot]

Why does everything need a label anyway? If it does then what label would you give someone who loves astronomy, watches all the documentaries they can and reads plenty of books on the subject, studies science at the open university, goes on astronomy courses to gain as much knowledge as possible, thinks about it almost obsessively and wants/dreams to be unrealistically (one day) at the forefront of discovering the mysteries of the universe but doesn't 'stargaze' much at all?

[brantuk]

Well there's a spot of a difference between wildlife photography and astronomy. To do astrophotography you do have to be a bit of an expert at astronomy first. It's a steep learning curve that leads to snapping dso's. Anyone can take a picture of an elephant in a field or a flower in the azores lol

[blackparticle]

Well it's not like you are stealing anyone's photons so does it matter what you do with them?

[meteoriot]

Well there's a spot of a difference between wildlife photography and astronomy. To do astrophotography you do have to be a bit of an expert at astronomy first. It's a steep learning curve that leads to snapping dso's. Anyone can take a picture of an elephant in a field or a flower in the azores lol

I get your point. Wildlife photography can be much harder than you suggest though. Yes anyone can take a pic of an elephant but you try getting a close up clear pic of a humming bird or a bird if prey the moment it swoops and snatches it's prey I personally wouldn't know what part of the world, likely location, habitat, time of year, camera and equipment requirements etc etc etc

And anyone can take a snap of the moon just like anyone can take a snap of the cat next door but there is much more to it than that isn't there

[JamesM]

I would agree with Matt that astrophotography (be it for good or bad) has certainly lifted the profile of astronomy as evidenced by the number of new people who after watching the BBC's Stargazing Live, joined this forum wanting to know more about how they could participate.

Mick, I love digital photography and have plenty of decent kit to capture everything on the planet. However, I quickly found that it was a little too easy to take a huge number of images during an outing which ultimately meant, that I had then created a work flow of processing/cropping etc. I found that taking photographs and the 'work' that this generated starting to make photography feel rather onerous. I love air shows for example but have now decided to attend without a camera, so that I have the time to take it all in, to breathe in the fumes and hear the roar of the engines, to have the time to stand and stare rather than constantly checking exposures, white balance and focusing etc. It was for these reasons that when I looked at astronomy, I decided I was not going to be seduced by astrophotography. I will certainly read up about it, the latest gadgets etc and I always check out Picture of the Week and applaud the fantastic images that so many forum members produce. If I want to 'keep' some images of what objects actually look like rather than how I normally view them, I'll buy a large book with glossy pictures taken by Hubble (...I've got too many of these) it's certainly the cheapest imaging option.

My feeling Mick, is that imaging for you appears to be a solitary pursuit as I am sure it is for a number of your fellow imagers and for some, not all, that might be one of the costs of having kit that is semi-permanent. One of the joys of observing is the mobility factor which means you are able to meet up with other observers and share in the knowledge, experience, banter and of course the views, especially if your friends have very nice large eyepieces! It is interesting to note how many people share their images on here, be it to help reinforce their achievements or to solicit help and guidance, but I wonder how many people would still image if there was no outlet for their work? The point I'm making here is that the need to share is an important part of any interest and from what you say Mick you don't feel able to do that with your images either. There is of course perhaps another wider difficulty here, and it's something we ALL experience and that is equipment limitation. The potential costs of imaging does mean that some people are confronted with this difficulty sooner than others and I am sure that this must be very frustrating. Although really good images can be achieved under 'manual' control, it's clear that greater tracking accuracy and lower sub times can be achieved and made less onerous with the flutter of a thick cheque book. So by purchasing greater consistency, interest in this area of activity is probably easier to sustain.

I would recommend leaving the imaging for a while and instead enjoy some observing in the company of other stargazers, which I'm sure will lift your enthusiasm and help release you from the burden of collecting imaging data. You will come back to it soon so please don't sell your kit, but I think you're in need of lifting your interest in astronomy rather than reducing it to a performance of procedures, protocols and subs.

James

[F15Rules]

What a great thread:icon_salut:...

I'm in the "each to their own" camp, although personally I'm a visual only observer, and don't often have a plan of what I'm going to look at before I go outside...I'm usually just that pleased if the night is clear in the first place!

I remember about a year ago, I went to a guys' house to collect an eyepiece I had bought...I won't name the guy as I'd hate him to think I was criticising him, but in the middle of his living room was this amazing Astro Physics mount. It was unlike anything I'd ever seen before, electric up down, in/out, you name it, and looked like it weighed a ton. I remarked on it and he said, very proudly, he'd just bought it for a bargain price of £4.5k:eek::eek:, and it was to be used for his TMB 6" Apo Refractor..as a refractor nut my interest was now well up, and I said something like "that must give some awesome views mate!". His reply floored me..."I really don't know, Dave, I've never looked through it visually, I only do AP"..so here was a guy having spent the best part of £10k on a rig I could only ever dream of, and had never looked through it:p:D:eek:.

I suppose that is his absolute right to do so (or not, in this case), but I couldn't help thinking he was missing a great opportunity..

For me, the ghostly pale wispy appearance of M42 on a frosty January night is every bit as thrilling as the admittedly stunning images made and posted here by AP fans.

I think we should keep a healthy respect for each area of our hobby, and celebrate together the different ways in which we study and admire this incredible universe we live in.

Dave

[meteoriot]

I think we should keep a healthy respect for each area of our hobby, and celebrate together the different ways in which we study and admire this incredible universe we live in.

Dave

Definitely!!!

I love it all, just dont have time or money for it all lol. Also we need specialists in all areas not just 'jacks of all trades'

[lulu57]

I started off with a pair of binos, I got a 4" SCT, then an 8" SCT.

But I have recently bought the most useful visual aid of all - an inflatable lounger. This enables me to look up at the night sky without my neck hurting.

I have found that what I really like is tracing the patterns of the constellations and looking for shooting stars.

I'm a star gazer in the most basic sense, but I appreciate nature in the way that suits me best.

Find what makes you happy and stick to it, I say!