Observing - For Detail & Sketching

[Qualia]

Tweaking Detail and Sketch Preparation

There's no correct way for enjoying our stargazing sessions. Some nights it's great to run around the heavens in marathon style, other times to pick an object and tweak everything we can from it for hours on end; there is no right or wrong way. But after a private correspondence with a fellow member here at SGL this week and seeing a couple of posts asking similar questions, I thought I'd go through a given procedure that I often use for Observing and Sketching. Most of what I write will already be known but I think it's worth going through.

Dark Skies

The first step is getting out to a Dark Site. If this isn't possible, no worries but you will be robbing yourself of detail that might have been possible. However, observing in light polluted areas can be very useful, not only do you continue to hone your star-hoping skills but you can still make sketches and jot down features you have seen and later compare them with your dark site ones. This is an interesting project in itself, for you'll see the effects LP has on your eye and the given object first hand. Needless to say, not all celestial objects are adversely affected by light pollution and you can view planets, the Moon and Sun, for example, without any detrimental affect. Indeed, light pollution could even make observing brighter planets easier, for there may be less glare to contend with.

Space Tourist Vs Space Visitor

I often feel it is better to be a visitor, rather than a tourist. Many people will go to a museum, for example, and will try to rush all the paintings, but at the end of the day they only remember one or two of them at best and not that well either and the same analogy could be used when it comes to stargazing.

Sure, there is no right way to plan our sessions and the following procedure is certainly not one I'd recommend all the time, but I do think it is important to slow down from time to time. I appreciate that this slowing-down exercise can be frustrating at times. In my case, a three hour dark site session involves an operation of about 6 to 7 hours. After all that preparation, packing gear, travelling, setting up and so on, when I get out to the dark site my first instinct is to start buzzing all over the skies, but if a sketch is planned or you really want to get down to details, depending on what is being viewed, at sometime or other you will need to give yourself at least an hour, maybe two, or more. 

Visual Astronomy: Locating & Observing

There are two essential features to visual astronomy. The first is to find the object and the second is to observe it. The former process invoves star-hopping and reading star maps, the latter requires you to slow down and to engage yourself with the complexity and beauty of what is being observed. It's been said many times but anything glanced at will always look like a featureless something or other: an egg, a city wall, a cloudless sky or a dentist's tiled floor. But the trick is to go beyond this style of looking and practice picking out features and textures.

Question Time

I find the best way of observing an object is to place it in a low power EP and to begin asking some basic questions about it. These questions could include stuff like:

• What am I looking at?
• What have I read or seen of this object that can inform my observation?
• What shape does it seem to have?
• How many stars can I see in my field of view? What colour are they? Are there differing intensities of brightness between them?
• Can any of these stars be tweaked out as doubles? Can I quickly guess a rough positional angle for them? A separation in arc seconds?
• How does the object's appearance change as I flip from direct to averted vision and back again?
• Can any stars be resolved in the object itself (if a glob, for example), and are they across the entire surface, only at the edges, or none at all?
• Are there any stars in the line of sight that appear as if they are part of the object? (Local stars 'within' galaxies, or appearing as moons on planets)
• When I move away from the eyepiece to relax my eye, what can I recall about this object that can inform me further? Was there anything distinct about it that struck my eye or memory.

I'll then up the magnification again, to something around 80x to 90x. And ask a few more questions. Stuff like:

• How has the image changed?
• How many stars have now been cut away?
• Has anything in the image become dimmer or lighter?
• Has the object itself changed in any fashion?
• Are there any new patterns, shapes or colours to be seen within it?
• Are given areas of my new field of view more pronounced than others?
• If I close and relax my eye away from the eyepiece can I picture the object there 'within'?

I'll then up the magnification to the optimum power, that which gives the sharpest and clearest image at the highest magnification possible and go through the same questions as above. Obviously, if the object is too large or has low surface brightness, you can skip this high-magnification stage but in all cases the trick is to be asking yourself questions about the object to not only appreciate the subtle detail and complexity therein but also to have a general picture of how the object is framed within your eyepieces and mind.

Filters

Some people love them, others not nearly so much but if you are going to use a filter, you should go through the same questioning process as above. The object will look different and you may prefer the look with or without but it's nice to understand why this is so and to appreciate any improvements in the image but also any detrimental affects a filter may have.

Long Winded?

Now, all this may look a little long winded and perhaps it is, but I feel it'll pay out dividends and with practice depending on the complexity of the object really shouldn't take more that 5, 10, 15, 20 minutes or so. The questioning process can be exhausting, so I usually dedicate it to one or two objects at most and not on every session I make. It is also nice and extremely important to have sessions where we just sit back and drink in the beauty around us without thought or mind, or to plan other projects like splitting doubles, completing lists, and so on.

Sketching

If you are going to sketch you are now armed with a better understanding and visual appreciation of the given celestial object. With the questioning over, when you feel you are ready, pick up the given drawing instrument you prefer and begin to sketch what you are looking at. Draw yourself a decent sized cirlce and start by drawing the field stars paying attention to their spacing relative to each other and brightness. It isn't always necessary to draw all of the stars you see but the ones you do ought to serve as a guide for the sketch of the object itself.

Sketching is an iterative, mechanical process: you look through the eyepiece, you sketch a little something, you compare, you look again, sketch a little more, compare, and on and on you go. If you find you are getting bored, relax, take a little break, and when you are ready, return again.

Contrary to what the casual or nonobserver may think, I feel the point of sketching is not to create some beautiful rendering of the object itself, but rather training your eye to see better. If we adopt this attitude, I feel we are giving stargazing and sketching a more egalitarian footing, for by implication it means we can all sketch and share our works without embarrassment or shame, or feeling that somehow sketching is limited to some elite, a select few who have artisitic talent and expertise.

You keep going back and forth from eyepiece to paper until you feel you have either had enough for the night or that your drawing contains most of the details you have seen. Whatever the tools or techniques used, when sketching be sure to use a green or red light and try to be as comfortable as possible.

I hope this post helps in some manner

[foundaplanet]

Very well written and informative guide to the art of seeing as well as drawing the object Qualia, particularly like the part.........

• If I close and relax my eye away from the eyepiece can I picture the object there 'within'?    This is something I try to practice and then go to sleep trying to remember objects.

I must have a go at drawing a couple of DSO's sometime soon... You do sometimes leave me feeling like a lazy astronomer...

[jetstream]

Qualia,thanks for taking the time to write this great post.

[TwoPi]

Great post Qualia, and I must say that with regard to the sketches that you and other members post on SGL, I find them really inspiring and they often encourage me to revisit objects I think I know well only to discover further detail and beauty... cheers matey! 

[John]

Thats a great post and really ought to be a "sticky" 

It really bears out the saying "the more you look, the more you will see" which I find so true, especially on the planets, which don't reveal all they have to offer initially, by any means.

[swamp thing]

Indeed, great post.

I for one never leave out the high power stage though, even if it is filling the FOV several times, or has low surface brightness. You may well see something at high power that you missed at medium to low. This I've learnt from experience. Some times it adds nothing at all to the image you've already seen, but others.......you may well be surprised at what high power can drag out.

I think it's all to easy to think. "Faint fuzzy, I'll stick in my low power eyepiece" then maybe go to medium and that's it. Try going high power.......you may see something you overlooked before

[Qualia]

Thank you for your kind thoughts and sentiments.

Steve, when I get myself out to a dark site, I'll certainly look into your 3rd stage suggestion

[AndyWB]

Try going high power.......you may see something you overlooked before

I've also found that sometimes higher power can offer a better view if you're somewhere light polluted. I know, it isn't ideal, but sometimes life prevents a trip out into the countryside. What I've noticed a few times is that adding power seems to improve contrast under LP, and that can draw out more detail.

Maybe it's just in my head, but certainly it's seemed that way to me.

[AlexB67]

I've also found that sometimes higher power can offer a better view if you're somewhere light polluted. I know, it isn't ideal, but sometimes life prevents a trip out into the countryside. What I've noticed a few times is that adding power seems to improve contrast under LP, and that can draw out more detail.

Maybe it's just in my head, but certainly it's seemed that way to me.

It is indeed true, It can be demonstrated that there is such a thing as an optimal magnification of an object that strikes that  balance  taking into account sky background darkness, contrast ratio, various factors. see for example http://www.uv.es/jrtorres/index.html   scroll down a bit, ( direct links never seem to work on that site ) but you'll find an article there  discussing the subject at some length and how various methods exist to calculate it with greater or lesser degrees of success. 

[bingevader]

Fantastic post, we await the sticky!

my brother and sisters were allocated all the artistic genes in my family, so even for my own amusement (and it would be highly amusing) sketching would add nothing to my observing sessions except frustration and disappointment at my inability.

However, I love spent hours getting lost in or submerging myself in one particular object to the exclusion of all others.

Cheers

[John]

Every now and then I have a go at sketching what I'm observing. I'm not really interested in the end result but the process makes you observe more keenly and more critically.

[Qualia]

Every now and then I have a go at sketching what I'm observing. I'm not really interested in the end result but the process makes you observe more keenly and more critically.

+ a million for this tip. I think this is what sketching should be about.

[bingevader]

Every now and then I have a go at sketching what I'm observing. I'm not really interested in the end result but the process makes you observe more keenly and more critically.

Seriously, I'm talking no ability here though! 

I'd be wasting time when I could be observing more keenly and critically, sketching would be an unnecessary and pointless added distraction.

It's like the Einstein quote someone here has on their sig. If you're going to assess my observational skills on my ability to sketch, then I'll always be a fish that can't climb trees!

Horses for courses as always in this life. 

Cheers

[scarp15]

Every now and then I have a go at sketching what I'm observing. I'm not really interested in the end result but the process makes you observe more keenly and more critically.

I think that this is completely true. If you do embark on sketching, consider it as a facility to enhance your observational experience, therefore as a process and not, so to speak as a finished entity.

 

Essentially that is what 'thumb nail' sketching is all about, an immediate response that builds up an intimacy or empathy with a subject, perhaps over a short duration. it is not necessarily required to become a completed end product.

If I took it up, I would use a medium that I could coordinate briskly, such as ink, applied with an ink pen and perhaps any organic material lying around i.e. twigs, feathers, which will create varied mark making or textural qualities.

For a more in depth appreciation of sketching, If you get the chance, then pay a visit the Clore (Turner) Gallery (Tate Britain) or look up a copy of JMW Turner In Turners Footsteps.

[CJ77]

Great Post, this answers a number of questions that I asked on a thread a few days ago about sketching! Thanks for the time and the info!!

[wayneh]

have to say great post for us new to astronomy cheers :-)

[nicks90]

Brilliant post, and sketching is something I will be trying at some point, but I really am in no rush as it is!

A couple of years scope observing and only 'bagged' about 30 messiers, I'm just not in a rush and I get lost in an object for hours at time already!