Sky and Telescope

[Grierson]

As a novice I've bought a couple of star atlases but I've not been too impressed with either. I picked up in another thread that Sky and Telescope produce a good example of a star atlas, which I've now bought, and from my limited prospective I find it excellent. Which brings me to the point , does anyone know how the Sky and Telescope Mag. compares to the UK pblications, particularly Astonomy Now?

[mikeDnight]

Astronomy Now is a pretty good magazine though I rarely buy it, unless there's something in a particular issue that is of interest. Sky & Telescope used to be in a far higher league than any other astro mag but a few years ago it was taken over by a company that started to hack away at the content. However S & T, for my money, is still the best of the bunch by a significant margin.

Mike.

[noah4x4]

My concern with most popular astronomy magazines is that they lure budding astronomers into false expectations of what they might see. Then apart from solar system objects people become frustrated and disillusioned with this hobby.

Hubble images are fine where relevant. Those wonderfully artistic images produced by readers with top dollar cameras and then air-brushed in Photoshop also have their place (I would argue in an art gallery!). But rarely do we see the images that we can actually see through our own telescopes.

In a recent BBC  Sky at Night article (October 2016) was a well intended and thoughtful article illustrating suitable celestrial objects to target under "City; Suburbs; Rural and Dark Sky".  All lovely photos, but little  like anything I have ever seen in my suburban location. I suspect that high quality library images have been used by the sub-editor out of context with the thrust of the article. Frankly, I have not seen objects  that good even at dark sky locations. Most nebulae and galaxies are little better than a smokey smudge in my 203mm SCT. Today I had a conversation with the owner of a 235mm aperture SCT and he concurred (or are we both simply duff astronomers?). The human eye is incapable of teasing out the detail shown in such photographs. This then encourages the adoption of higher magnification when lower magnification is often the better way to go with DSO's. 

The obvious response is that dull thumbprint smokey smudges don't sell magazines! But when the article is about visual astronomy and what you might see in various sky conditions why can't they be more realistic? Maybe show both a typical visual and enhanced camera image alongside each other.  Then amateur science doesn't get overwhelmed by 'art' that is beyond the reach and pockets of the majority.

[noah4x4]

Since making the above observation, I came across this in another thread

.http://www.pbase.com/mike73/messier_sketches

This is what I mean by realism. No artistic enhancements just what the eye can see, albeit through a bigger 'scope and darker skies than most of us might own. Sketching is far more realistic than long exposure photography.  It' s just a shame I can't draw more than a stick man.

[Grierson]

Many thanks for the comments

[xyz]

noah4x4 -  thank you for the pbase link. Excellent collection of drawings, close to what I can make out through the polluting glare.

Re the OP, I subscribe to the digital S&T edition, I like the magazine and enjoy the spread of topics addressed but many of the articles do often seem to be aimed at readers with significantly more sophisticated kit than I have, who are located in much less light polluted areas and enjoy many more evenings of clear skies than I do. On the other hand, there is a limit on what can be written and described about naked eye observing in suburban skies where it's often cloudy . The monthly observing section is good and points me in an interesting direction most of the time.

[Grierson]

10 hours ago, noah4x4 said:

My concern with most popular astronomy magazines is that they lure budding astronomers into false expectations of what they might see. Then apart from solar system objects people become frustrated and disillusioned with this hobby. ..................................................

There is a lot of truth in that! My humble efforts at imaging so far have been not much more than smokey smudges of where I believe galaxies to be. But I enjoy the challenge and as a newcomer I am reading anything and everything but I am fortunately (regrettably) at an age where I am able to disregard much of the content as beyond my reach.

[Grierson]

41 minutes ago, xyz said:

noah4x4 -  thank you for the pbase link. Excellent collection of drawings, close to what I can make out through the polluting glare.

Re the OP, I subscribe to the digital S&T edition, I like the magazine and enjoy the spread of topics addressed but many of the articles do often seem to be aimed at readers with significantly more sophisticated kit than I have, who are located in much less light polluted areas and enjoy many more evenings of clear skies than I do. On the other hand, there is a limit on what can be written and described about naked eye observing in suburban skies where it's often cloudy . The monthly observing section is good and points me in an interesting direction most of the time.

Thanks. As I implied above I have a fair bit of reading on the go at this time but I was impressed with the atlas they produce and I wondered if the content of the magazine reflected a similar standard. Unfortunately I too live in a light polluted suburban area so in the light of your comments I think I will pass on Sky and Telescope for the moment!! 

[Piero]

I regularly read Sky and Telescope. To me the articles are well written, a magazine written by amateurs/professionals to amateurs. I bought other magazines to compare, but as Mike previously said, also my money are on S&T. 

[Timmers]

Hi there, 1st post from someone with no Astronomy experience but this thread kind of helped with a question I was going to pose. I've been loaned a SkyWatcher ST 102 with AZ SynScan but no eyepieces. I've done a fair bit of reading the last couple of weeks (Turn left at Orion and also a quite technical book Astronomy: By Dinah Moche) which has given me some confidence that I like the idea of Star Gazing. That being said I bought some decent lenses so I can have a play with SkyWatcher.

I've looked at the tonight's forecast for Salisbury Plain where I live and it looks pretty clear. I live in a village with no street lights and literally backing on to the triangle that is Tilshead-Shrewton-Chitterne for those that know the area.

Question 1! How do the skies here compare with certified dark sky areas?

Question 2: I've read a lot about dew causing issues. So if I take the scope outside for 30 mins before viewing will I get any dew or condensation issues that I should worry about?

Question 3: Not worried much about the SynScan side of things as I like the idea (currently) of navigating my own way around and I've been learning constellations and major stars. The low sky behind me is blocked by trees looking North although last night in the cloud breaks I could see Ursa Major to my right, Cassiopeia above and behind me and the moon rose to my left. Anything in front of that line is fair game tonight. Is the moon going to cause too much of an issue for seeing DSO's (or after reading this thread...smudges? :-) ) What should be my expectations for a night like this please?  Anyone care to suggest something for me to target as my first viewing?

Hope this wasn't too much waffle? So much information and so much to learn!

cheers

 

[Astro Imp]

Unfortunately the moon is not going to help with finding/viewing DSOs but don't worry it will become less of a problem as the month progresses.

As you have a good view of  Cassiopeia that would be a good place to start. You mention Turn Left @ Orion, have a look at the open clusters described there.

HTH and good luck.

 

[Timmers]

2 hours ago, Astro Imp said:

Unfortunately the moon is not going to help with finding/viewing DSOs but don't worry it will become less of a problem as the month progresses.

As you have a good view of  Cassiopeia that would be a good place to start. You mention Turn Left @ Orion, have a look at the open clusters described there.

HTH and good luck.

 

Alan, Thanks for this. I've just read the relative pages and will let you know how I get on! 

Is dew /condensation likely to be an issue? If it happens how do people deal with it best in the absence of Dew heaters? Are Dew heaters the solution and everyone uses them?

[swamp thing]

@Timmers

You might want to Check this out

Observed from the plain a few times....Its pretty dark.

[Timmers]

3 minutes ago, swamp thing said:

@Timmers

You might want to Check this out

Observed from the plain a few times....Its pretty dark.

Hi Steve,

Thanks.. I had previously had a look at their website but it hadn't been updated since 2015. You just prompted me to have a look again and I've noticed that like a lot of other clubs with websites they've now gone down the Facebook route. I've now contacted them.  cheers