Jump to content

AstronomyNow rankle

MartinB

By MartinB
in The Astro Lounge

Recommended Posts

thing

thing

Posted
Posted

I'm a subscriber to AN too, it's an excellent mag. I can't see why a few column inches of one man's opinion should change my view of it. I disagree with what he says, that's an end to it. I might agree with what he says next month, either way so what? I'm hardly going to loose sleep over it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 138
  • Created
  • Last Reply
barkis

barkis

Posted
Posted

Somehow I don't think so Steve. If I had the skill to do that, I would, but I don't. I was never any good at Art of any kind, even the basic stuff at school all those years ago, used to get me a cuff of the lugs, because the Art teachers always thought I was Mickey Taking with my poor efforts.

I could draw a Lowry Stick man, dog, or whatever.

I think sketching at the eyepiece is a unique skill, and requires an awareness of perspective among things. An imager may or may not be a good observer, a sketcher, who is dedicated to that medium, will be an excellent observer. This of course is my own Opinion.

Ron. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Naz

Naz

Posted
Posted

Surely imaging allows those without access to large scopes to capture detail not visible to the standard amateurs scope-aided eye and allows the detail examination in the cold light of day and then we can identify the individual components of the object.

My only knowledge of Neil Bone is his appearances on S@N and his column in AN, he comes across as an enthusiastic person, passionate about the subject. Probably he has achieved what he set out to do, got us to talk about and possibly assess what we do. Take pretty pictures and get the "oh that's good" comment, or take detailed photos so we learn and observe through our photos by comparing those of others.

Surely all methods of recording our time at the scope is valid? With a picture we have something we can share and discuss.

Great to have feedback from Keith Cooper, and I am sure that Neil may have something to say in the next issue.

Archie

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Milamber

Milamber

Posted
Posted

Ah, well there you are, I think it *is* an evolution to sketching - inasmuch as one is a natural path from the other (a desire to record something for others) - regardless of whether you are any good at itor not.

But, on to what most seem to be taking exception to - *another* bl**dy M42? Hell yes, these images are a metric for us. And for others. They show how skills are improving, how the techniques are improving, and how our appreciation of what is above us is improving. I have made my own input into the imaging revolution, however small and insignificant, but I have to say that there came a point with me when I realised that yes, I could take some nice images and yes, they were technically good too. I did, however, at the same time, realise that I was missing out on *seeing* this stuff. Most will know that at that point Big Blue came on the scene :)

My point? One thing can lead to another, and it is not always the direction one expects and whichever way you do things it's all astronomy - and it's all Astronomy too. Enjoy it whichever part of it you do and ignore those narrow-minded souls that are missing out.

Arthur

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tim

Tim

Posted
Posted

I agree with Kai, obviously in the early days, there was no way to attach a camera to a telescope. How could you possibly describe what you had seen to somebody? The only way would be to draw it.

I have often thought about painting one of the images from hubble etc. But I have decided against this, as in my mind, the only way to properly capture the depth and beauty of these nebula etc is with a photographic print. yeh sure, I could transfer every detail and dot to canvas and reproduce the photo in every detail, but in that case, why bother? For me art is very much wrapped up in how the artist perceives the subject, and then his/her personality or particular style are transferred to the canvas. But take M42 for instance, my own personal opinion is that it transcends particular personalities or styles. It is there for the whole of mankind to appreciate, and almost beyond adulteration by the artist. My humble opinion is that to do M42 real justice, you HAVE to take a photo of it. Nothing you will ever see visually, nothing you will ever sketch at the eyepiece will ever fully represent the glory and majesty that is intrinsic in that particular DSO.

Of course, this takes nothing away from those very talented individuals who produce remarkable pictures at the eyepiece, I especially enjoy the ones of planets, the level of detail is amazing.

Maybe I have it wrong and should start on my m42 canvas right away, perhaps my fortune is in selling 'original' works of art at astronomy fairs. But for now, the original work of art is the DSO in the sky, and the only way I find I can appreciate that as much as it deserves, is through a photograph.

I dont think the thread should be taken as a personal attack on anybody, but when somebody writes, and more importantly puts their name to an article, then they open the door to others opinions. I have to say though, this has been a thoroughly enjoyable thread, I'm glad the AN guy came along and made a comment, the only thing that could further improve it is a visit from Mr Bone too. It's all too easy to take a written article, and read it in a completely different way from what was intended by the author. I have fallen foul of this myself with newspapers several times. So come on Neil, what do you think ? :)

TJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites
thing

thing

Posted
Posted

I had to have a wry grin when reading Peter Grego's article about lunar sketching in this month's AN. Peter produces stunning lunar sketches for AN, but........he gave up using paper and pencil in 2004 and now uses a cyber sketch pad. Not that it matters one iota to me, it' still great to see what he does but it's hardly the traditional way now is it........this pesky computerised stuff gets everywhere...... :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
barkis

barkis

Posted
Posted

How about going back to chiselling images onto a granite slab. That's as far back as it goes. Unless the slab is the first album, in which case it has to be the cave wall. :)

Perhaps we can claw our way back to the 21st century again, this raffia thread is straying too far. :D

Ron.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jamie

Jamie

Posted
Posted

How about going back to chiselling images onto a granite slab. That's as far back as it goes. Unless the slab is the first album, in which case it has to be the cave wall. :lol:

Perhaps we can claw our way back to the 21st century again, this raffia thread is straying too far. :D

Ron.

Jeeze Ron get a grip mate!!!

Everyone knows that the first CD's were made of 3 x 2 slabs.....

No wonder early man walked with a stoop, having to carry the latest CD Walkman about...

Don't even get me started on the first ghetto blasters.... :):D:lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Talitha

Talitha

Posted
Posted
Everyone knows that the first CD's were made of 3 x 2 slabs.....

No wonder early man walked with a stoop, having to carry the latest CD Walkman about...

Don't even get me started on the first ghetto blasters.... :):D:lol:

:laughing3: :laughing3: :laughing3: So that's why we invented the wheel !!! :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
barkis

barkis

Posted
Posted

So Ptolemy didn't try his hand at lunar imaging with a webcam? :)

he was probably using a DMK or Skynyx... (clever boy old Ptolomy!)

he managed to Map Titan millenia before Huygens got there... must have had some pretty good narrow band filters in place too..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:PtolemyWorldMap.jpg

Good grief, did the man never clean the sensor. See the Dust Bunnies on that image.

A disgrace. :mrgreen:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Milamber

Milamber

Posted
Posted

Theres a very apt quote that sums it all up:

"Theres nothing new under the Sun"

Doesnt matter that a million eyes have seen what I have seen... when I first saw it - it WAS the first time !

... and that really does sum it up, no matter how you "see" it. Like a stone broken open for the first time on a ploughed field... you were there first.

Arthur

PS - or an egg for that matter!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kai

Kai

Posted
Posted

Just noticed the front cover of AN , behind the writing "One man and his Telescope , the visual astronomy special issue" is a picture of One man and his telescope WITH what looks like a CCD attached :):D:lol:

Further investigation (on page 5) gives the front image credit to one Nik Szymanek ,that internationally well know Imager :thumbright::lol::D :D :D:shocked: .In fact the bloke on the front cover IS Nik unless my visual eyes decive me :mrgreen:

In the words of Homer........DOH !!!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
barkis

barkis

Posted
Posted

Just noticed the front cover of AN , behind the writing "One man and his Telescope , the visual astronomy special issue" is a picture of One man and his telescope WITH what looks like a CCD attached :lol: :lol: :D

Further investigation (on page 5) gives the front image credit to one Nik Szymanek ,that internationally well know Imager :thumbright::D :D :shocked: :shocked: :shocked: .In fact the bloke on the front cover IS Nik unless my visual eyes decive me :mrgreen:

In the words of Homer........DOH !!!!!!

There must me a shortage of Visual observers Steve. At least pictures of them. :):D

Ron

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.