Recent magazine picture galleries, or now wallet gallery?

[PortableAstronomer]

Hi everyone,

One of the great things about this forum is that we're able to share great ideas and results that overcome everyday problems that most of us face, like having a suburban LP'd sky, or using DIY builds and achieving great photos without taking out a 2nd mortgage.

Until a couple of years ago I frequently used to see some inspirational shots in the photo gallery sections in the back of AN or S@N magazines; but recently it has become more like this...

"Mr X captured this image with a super-cooled Andor iXon3 888 e2V CCD201-20 EMCCD camera ..."

"Mr Y captured this image with his 1 metre telescope on La Palma ..."

"Mr Z captured this image with his 20-inch PlaneWave CDK 20 telescope on a Paramount ME mount in his observatory in Mauna Kea ..."

Don't get me wrong, these people have probably worked hard for their super equipment and put lots of time and effort into their astro work, but on the *very* top end of the equipment level, you would surely start to lose the connection with the majority of the readers.

Obviously the gallery contributors have done amazing work, but with the greatest respect, wouldn't the majority of us rather see good results from those who've shown some inspirational ways of saving money, or cutting through urban light pollution, or fought the typical challenges that the rest of us face, and make us think "oh I could try doing that...."

My question is, who are these magazine judges trying to inspire here?

[ollypenrice]

Honestly, this isn't my impression. In fact I feel that DSLR images are over represented sometimes, partly because the production staff don't understand astro images with small pixel counts. A while back one of the best astro images I have ever seen, but taken on a small Sony 285 chip, appeared in the 'also ran' section while an incredibly mundane DSLR picture won Pic of the Month. Either the award was based on good effort with affordable kit (which is fine by me) or the production staff just considered pixel count to mean resolution, without realizing that a large load of mush is still... a load of mush. (No, I'm not saying all DSLR images are a load of mush but this one was!) I won't embarrass the member whose 'small' image was so utterly superb but he is greatly admired on this forum and that has little to do with cash and a lot to do with dedication, grit and flair.

Olly

[Telrad]

Honestly, this isn't my impresion. In fact I feel that DSLR images are over represented sometimes, partly because the production staff don't understand astro images with small pixel copunts. Last yeaaaar one of the best astro images I have ever seen, but t

...pls finish the sentence Olly

[engstrom]

I think pics taken on high-end gear still inspire others with lower spec gear. I regularly see such pics and think that once the skies finally clear I'm going to have a go at that feature and see what I get.

[ollypenrice]

...pls finish the sentence Olly

Sorry mon brave, a false click and I was cut off in me prime!!! Now rectified...

Olly

[Tim]

It's all very subjective, and impossible to say what is "right", or "wrong" without alienating someone or other.

It's one of the things the SGL Pic of the Week judging team take into account, and we try to be careful not to consistently choose pictures that are taken with equipment that is out of reach of the majority of astronomers. I like to think we have a reasonable balance, but whatever we choose, there will always be an element of compromise, and I guess that is just as true for the magazines.

Personally, i dont submit pics to any of the mags, simply because a) I dont buy them, and I enjoy astrophotography for what I can achieve in my own back yard in my own obsy, not in comparison to Tom, Richard or Harry. If AP felt like a competition in any way I dont think I'd bother. And if Tom Rich or Harry can afford a Hubblesque telescope in Namibia, good luck to them, their pics are as welcome as those taken with a pinhole camera

Cheers

Tim

[harry page]

Hi

Seem to be getting a lot of stick

Harry

It's all very subjective, and impossible to say what is "right", or "wrong" without alienating someone or other.

It's one of the things the SGL Pic of the Week judging team take into account, and we try to be careful not to consistently choose pictures that are taken with equipment that is out of reach of the majority of astronomers. I like to think we have a reasonable balance, but whatever we choose, there will always be an element of compromise, and I guess that is just as true for the magazines.

Personally, i dont submit pics to any of the mags, simply because a) I dont buy them, and I enjoy astrophotography for what I can achieve in my own back yard in my own obsy, not in comparison to Tom, Richard or Harry. If AP felt like a competition in any way I dont think I'd bother. And if Tom Rich or Harry can afford a Hubblesque telescope in Namibia, good luck to them, their pics are as welcome as those taken with a pinhole camera

Cheers

Tim

[PortableAstronomer]

Thanks for your responses. It looks like it's just me being a grumpy old man ! :-)

Important point raised there of course we do observing and imaging for our own personal sense of satisfaction and I can't imaging being into any serious "competition" side of it. I guess sometimes the magazine galleries introduce us to new objects that maybe we didn't attempt before and maybe there's some inspirational value there. Nevertheless I certainly do have particular respect for those who've gone outside and tried something unconventional. No shortage of those on SGL!

Clear Skies..

Chris

[astro mick]

Hi Chris.

Not at all.I think your views are very valid.I too often notice the expensive equipment that is being used to take these images.Its like everything else, the better the quality the better the result.Yes the processing is a major part as well,but you cant process a bad image,taken through a budget set-up into a magazine double spread.

People with top end equipment,will always have a big advantage over us budget restricted mortals.But we will strive to do our best,with what we have and still enjoy the process,and again i commend your point.

Mick.

[reddoss]

There are many types of astro-imaging and there is obviously a highly subjective element in deciding on a good image (I went to a talk by a famous astrophotographer recently in which they stated that he did not care for the Hubble pallet).

May be an answer would be to have different categories eg best image from an urban site, best DSLR image, best video/registax image, best CCD image etc. etc.

Mind you it would it would make life more difficult for the editors and judges.

Also I have noticed that on the S@N program recently that they are starting to use some astro images that have been taken with 'budget' equipment and are not necessarily the best images they could use. I guess this is to reflect the fact that most of us who submit images do not have equipment that costs the earth or access to dark skies all the time.

[MartinB]

If you can't get even on the equipment front you can on the creative side of things. This is where wide field DLSR work comes in, you don't need high end gear as much as planning, thought, patience and creativity.

[Uranium235]

If you can't get even on the equipment front you can on the creative side of things. This is where wide field DLSR work comes in, you don't need high end gear as much as planning, thought, patience and creativity.

Exactly what I was thinking.

Its not down to what you have, its individual creativity that makes your images unique.

Same applies in music, you dont need a massive studio with protools and every plugin known to man to create a masterpiece - a guitar or piano, a good melody/hook and a 4 track tape recorder will do.

[PortableAstronomer]

Maybe it would be more insteresting to see the "behind the scenes" photos of the equipment setup, the sky conditions etc, together with the result, that way we can see who is really working hard to make every photon count. Every other site seems to show pretty pictures but very little content behind the scenes. If I wanted to see a great detailed image of some DSO then I would look at some Hubble pictures. If I were looking for backyard inspiration then I would look to online forums such as SGL. So I'm still not sure what is the inspirational value of the current judgement in the magazine photo gallery competitions though.

[Deneb]

Astrophotography in your own light polluted backyard, there's nothing like it, plenty of challenge, especially when you spend a fair amout of time imaging Unguided.. Believe I know..., plenty of equations to have a brainstorm about..

Nadeem

[ollypenrice]

The best (or the worst) part of your kit is the sky. It is worth at least double the value of anything else. But then again, if someone posts a staggering Veil Nebula from the middle of London the image has a special impact on the imagination.

Olly

[PortableAstronomer]

hmmm, interesting point. I reckon a lot of us , if we had to choose between

- monster-sized scope in a light polluted, urban backyard

- good binoculars in a really dark sky

then a lot would choose the latter.

[Shibby]

I would love to think editors could choose images based on how good they are for the equipment they're taken on, therefore judging by talent alone. However, editors will often want the prettiest images available and I have no quibble with that. Besides, to achieve a great image with expensive equipment I'm sure takes a lot of talent and effort too, in many cases more than with more basic equipment.

Online forums such as SGL give me the inspiration to continue without upgrading to more expensive equipment. Also, the moderators here seem to choose their POWs in a very considered way, taking equipment into account.

This might be digressing a bit, but I'm happy to try and achieve the best I can with the equipment I have before upgrading. I find it a bit surprising when people rush to buy full, high-level setups before trying to perfect their skills first. Having said that, I'm sure if I had lots more money I'd have more kit by now.