stargazers live.... thoughts?

[RikM]

I enjoyed the shows tonight. I thought the feedback on the Mars image analysis was really good.

[x6gas]

Bottom line is it's great to have astronomy on one of the main channels during prime time.

I like Liz and I thought Chris Lintott was great (makes you wonder what S@N might be like with him in a more anchor role). I have to admit, though, that for me personally I didn't think this series was quite as good as the first two...

[kirkster501]

I frankly found the whole three episode production boring, banal and irrelevant. I switched off half way through the final one to read my Tour de France book. considering astronomy is my main hobby something a little wrong there ! Oh well, as long as others enjoyed it.

steve

[Rorth72]

Did you see the way that Brian was looking longingly at the pre solar material. Me and the other half looked at each other and said at the same time "Get a room!" lol.

Been a good 3 nights of viewing generally, though the second programme with more informal discussions with ideas bouncing between the scientists and the viewers I found the more interesting. Well done :-)

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

[Matt Scunthorpe]

I enjoyed it. Some more stargazing would of been nice but no one can control the weather, still, it rekindled the magic for me, and i enjoyed all 3 shows.

[DaveGarland]

OK I want one of those particle detectors.

How hard would they be to buy/make?

Yup, want on!!!

Yeah over all I think the series was a disappointment over the first two. But let's hope they have a little look at it and fix a few things and come back stronger next year.

[Tim]

didn't thin I'd hear myself say this, but bring back Jonathon Ross!

At least he was a proper amateur with a proper amateur scope asking proper questions.

This was just another science show

[kirkster501]

On the basis of this series I'd be interested if astro sales increase ? There was, what, 15 mins of show devoted to actual amateurs with telescopes over the three episodes. I am disappointed..... Sorry to be a victor meldrew butitbdid not float my boat at all.

[Chris Rowland]

I liked it.

We need to bear in mind that it's primary purpose is to interest and entertain people who aren't enthusiasts. Advanced amateur astronomers can't expect material that will stretch them. If people understand that astronomy and science are important it will be easier to finance people to do it, even though there may not be a benefit that happens in the next financial year - or the lifetime of a government.

Chris Lintott's Mars project was really good and as he said that's science. Finding something you don't understand, devising an experiment that explains it and discovering more things you don't understand! Wonderful!

I like the current style of "live" science programs, with a formal section followed by an apparently relaxed and informal section (I bet it isn't really, that relaxed chat seems like an Oxford tutorial where you sit around with your tutor drinking sherry while he politely demolishes your latest essay).

Chris

[Hermit]

Enjoyed it as usual but the wow factor is reducing the more experienced/knowledgable i become in astronomy over the years (i do understand who the show is aimed at, though, which is fine).

Some of the clips that I've seen on Sky at Night e.g. beginners with new scopes on this week's episode, star parties etc would be perfect for Stargazing Live.

Many people have said that the weather is a limiting factor for the show, but advice re buying/using telescopes (and even binoculars) can be done anywhere and anytime.

I do hope it returns next year but with more practical astronomy for newbies and less space coverage, or more reference to online resources re practical astronomy.

[pete_l]

On the basis of this series I'd be interested if astro sales increase ? There was, what, 15 mins of show devoted to actual amateurs with telescopes over the three episodes. I am disappointed..... Sorry to be a victor meldrew butitbdid not float my boat at all.

Yes, the lack of practical, hands-on content was a disappointment.

But on the other hand, consider the astro mags. A significant proportion of their content is cosmology, space exploration, theoretical physics and stories about historical figures / events (and that's the main reason I rarely buy one). I think we have to accept that the BBC is NEVER going to do astro equipment reviews. They're NEVER going to spend top-telly-time tinkering on the technicalities of telescopes. They're NEVER going to do star-charts and specific information about viewing particular DSOs or stars at prime-time (again: a turn off for their presumed "target audience" of mainstream, casual viewers who would equally well watch a series on small furry animals, or the history of the chamber pot, if it was in the same time slot).

So all that remains is the sort of non-astro, but vaguely space-related stuff that fills the first half of the magazines - which seems to be what the BBC have decided is as close as they're going to get to the hobby.

[Helen]

I think its important to remember that StargazingLive is about much more than just the programmes. Last night I helped out at the BBC run event in Newport. We had about 1,000 people of all ages doing planetarium shows, ledctures, rocket building, handling meteors.....and observing!!!! It was clear until about 8pm and I know that I showed over 50 peopleJupiter, bands and moons. Loads were kids (2 cub packs eg) and their parents were as wowed as the kids which was great. I did this with a Megrez 72 on a simple alt az mount, so it was good to show people what a small scope can do. People were amazed at the relatively cheap cost. What was really encouraging was those who came out after having done some of the inside sessions and were quoting what they'd been told about Jupiter.

I'm sure most of those who attended will have been telling their friends today

We get to do it all over again at the National Museum in Cardiff on Saturday

The guides to stargazing the BBC have produced are excellent and hopefully will keep people interested in the coming months.

The BBC really are putting a lot of effort into the whole package and we really should be encouraging them

Helen

[Chris Rowland]

Did you look out the window at Jodrell Bank? It was so foggy you could barely see the big radio scope.

The only practical hands on amateur astronomy you can do when it's like that is retreat indoors, drink scotch, and talk about astronomy and philosophy.

Just about every observing session I've had at my society's observatory has ended up with discussions of the big questions - how did it all start? How will it end? Is there anyone else? And are they sitting in their observatories having exactly the same conversation?

Chris

We have public sessions on Friday and Saturday evenings, wonder how many people will come - if if the weather will be any good.

[Gary23]

I would like to see man go back to the moon. Being only 22 years old I missed the first one by a bit

Rob.

I'd second this, I'm nearly 21 and would love the chance to see it.

Just imagine what it would be like this time around too, HD cameras etc.

[DaveGarland]

Actually I've only just seen the latest episode of The Sky At Night, and how much more focused on sky watching was that??!! Yes I like SWL, anything that whips up an interest in astronomy is good with me. And I like Brian Cox. He makes "nerdy" strangely cool. But honestly, The Sky At Night has always been the king of astronomy programmes and I really hope the beeb keeps it going. The lads really did a good job of it this month with sadly only a minimum input (obviously understandably) from Patrick. RIP Sir Patrick Moore and long live S@N!

[bingevader]

I think its important to remember that StargazingLive is about much more than just the programmes. Last night I helped out at the BBC run event in Newport. We had about 1,000 people of all ages doing planetarium shows, ledctures, rocket building, handling meteors.....and observing!!!! It was clear until about 8pm and I know that I showed over 50 peopleJupiter, bands and moons. Loads were kids (2 cub packs eg) and their parents were as wowed as the kids which was great. I did this with a Megrez 72 on a simple alt az mount, so it was good to show people what a small scope can do. People were amazed at the relatively cheap cost. What was really encouraging was those who came out after having done some of the inside sessions and were quoting what they'd been told about Jupiter.

I'm sure most of those who attended will have been telling their friends today

We get to do it all over again at the National Museum in Cardiff on Saturday

The guides to stargazing the BBC have produced are excellent and hopefully will keep people interested in the coming months.

The BBC really are putting a lot of effort into the whole package and we really should be encouraging them

Helen

I had a lovely time thanks!

The cloud had moved in by the 7.30 slot unfortunately.

I watched back to back S@N and SWL and enjoyed both!

However, I think they just need to let Brian Cox talk, he's much better ad lib and unscripted.

Dara and Liz? Hmmmmm.

Cheers

[bottletopburly]

​

i enjoyed it but ditch dara and find a celeb amateur astronomer big up to brian cox still got it

[Set Phasers To Malky]

I thoroughly enjoyed the last two nights episodes. I think the reason that SGL strayed 'off topic' for me this year was the fact that LB was at JPL. Last year was more about observing. Overall it was great and I look forward to 2014!

[Mansnake]

​

i enjoyed it but ditch dara

I agree. Dara is always trying to crack jokes with every sentence its so annoying. The two best people they had on over the three nights were Brian May and Chris Lintott. Chris Lintott knows what hes on about and can get it across well. Brian Cox is obviously very passionate about what he does and gets excited which is cool to see but maybe needs to drop it a notch.

I watched the latest S@N before stargazing live and it blew stargazing live out of the water and its only 30 mins long. At least on S@N they had first time astronomers on with there different scopes and you could see what they looked like and how they work.

If the show generates more young people to get involved in Astronomy and Science then i'm all for it but personally i thought the show could have been 100 times better than what it was.

[jason.p]

Over all, I enjoyed all three. You have to remember that this is aimed at quite a broad section the viewing public. For us it would have been good to devote the whole programme to amateur astronomy, observing, equipment setting up etc, but it would have lost many viewers after the first half hour. I think overall the balance was as good as we could expect,( it kept my wife's interest throughout which is as good an indicator as anything)

A couple of thoughts: I don't think The guest comedians (David Baddiel, Phil Jupitus) contributed anything. The third prog was better without them.

Not sure about Dara O Briain. I get the feeling there may be a bit of tension between him and BC.

Perhaps move the show to later in the year (although clear skies can never be guaranteed), or even better have two shows a year

[devilgas]

It always strikes me as a little sad when scientists try to act 'cool' in order not to come across as geeks. Dara tries to make a joke on every sentence he says and Brian appears over-excited.

And why do they have to drink on the second part - beer from bottles, not really PC but again 'we're cool'. Wonder what the excuse will be tonight.

Why is there a need to bring on so many celebrity-stars, again who try to be cool rather than geeky. As with the "I memorised all the periodic table but now I can't remember any of them."

As a result this is yet another programme that enters the realm of 'tabloid TV'.

Brian's 'this is so simple I can explain it with archaic chalk and blackboard' fell short. I don't think the world at large can deal with the oscillating nature of light. The Beeb has a massive graphics department they use to create adverts, why not use that to produce animated some simple explanations - for example showing the effect of the colour of light related to frequency.

For me the best presenter is Liz in the US. Calm, clear and informative without being excitable or cool. She should take over the whole thing.

Why so many presenters?

I imagine it's a big turn off for most people.

I wonder what the BBC market research shows - if they still do it after all the cuts.

was there anything you liked about the shows?

as already posted, i agree with your comments about including celebs. i've no problem with celebs being on the show - they're recognisable and not gonna freeze in front of live tv - but they need to at least have an active interest in astronomy instead of coming out with cheap humour that make them look just a little dumb.

why use a few days worth of graphics dept effort when a 30 sec sketch with a 5p piece of chalk does the job? we're now so used to seeing top notch graphics, that going back to basics is a refreshing change.

i remember when virtually all science based progs (tomorrows world being a notable exception) were covered in the same dust that was typical of the tired, stuffy professors that taught the subjects. SGLive, Wonders etc are so far removed from the old-school that the general populace are genuinely interested and engaged. enthusiasm and passion from the presenters is infectious, and, in my opinion, BC is the perfect person to be fronting these kinds of show.

[Scosmico]

Astronomy doesn’t need alcohol to be cool.

I am very critic to people drinking in a program where the presenters are supposedly inspiring people(including children) to stargaze.

Drinking doesn’t relate to my love of Astronomy. I felt in love with astronomy when I was a child.

There were many references to drinking and I honestly don’t think that is the program I will be showing to my daughters as an inspiration.

I understand that those references were done in the back to earth part, but I doesn’t reduce the editor’s and presenter's responsibility.

[JamesF]

Astronomy doesn’t need alcohol to be cool.

I am very critic to people drinking in a program where the presenters are supposedly inspiring people(including children) to stargaze.

Drinking doesn’t relate to my love of Astronomy. I felt in love with astronomy when I was a child.

There were many references to drinking and I honestly don’t think that is the program I will be showing to my daughters as an inspiration.

I understand that those references were done in the back to earth part, but I doesn’t reduce the editor’s and presenter's responsibility.

Doesn't bother me in the least. I'm quite happy for my children to watch it, and I'm quite happy to have a discussion with them about whether or not it's an appropriate way to behave if I feel such a conversation is warranted. Just like I'm quite happy for them to listen to Mumford & Sons "Little Lion Man" despite the lyrics being a little on the strong side having had a conversation with them about what will happen should they erroneously decide it's appropriate to use those words themselves.

James

[smudgeball]

didn't thin I'd hear myself say this, but bring back Jonathon Ross!

At least he was a proper amateur with a proper amateur scope asking proper questions.

I seem to remember him saying on a previous show that he had a Nexstar SE (not sure if it was a 6 or 8 ?)

So he'd get my vote

Obviously Brian May would then get the boot as he likes Dobs

[JamesF]

I seem to remember him saying on a previous show that he had a Nexstar SE (not sure if it was a 6 or 8 ?)

So he'd get my vote

Can't recall exactly which model it was, but he always comes across as someone who takes pride in his ignorance so I'd have no interest whatsoever in seeing him on the programme.

James