Are we heading towards tablets instead of EP's? :(

[Louis D]

I just thought of another advantage to remote observing from the comfort of your air conditioned home here in Texas: no mosquito swarms draining your body of blood (?‍♂️) during the summer months while you drip sweat onto your eyepieces.?  There are some clear, summer nights here that are just so dreadfully hot and sticky that I can't bring myself to go outside with a telescope and suffer.

[scarp15]

6 hours ago, cuivenion said:

I gave up on visual observing from my backyard due to security lights. Moving to EAA allowed me to view objects I would never have seen through an eyepiece, and getting the right settings for the conditions to get the best image keep me immersed in the experience. I find it very much more entertaining than looking up images on the net.?

I fully understand the thrill of visual observing, but I've never quite understood the resistance to using electronic aids in amateur astronomy. Nasa and professional observatories all over the world use them after all.

Telescopes and mounts are after all a type of technology that we use to explore the universe, but nobody suggests that we go back to just our eyeballs. I've noticed the same attitude towards Goto on occasion as well, which is really just a more advanced version of the setting circles on EQ mounts.

All that being said I am going to have to arrange a look at M51 through a massive Dob sometime.

 

I do not consider that this is a notion of resistance and routinely use electronics for supporting stargazing during dark sky sessions, a Unihedron Sky Quality Meter. I like the tools that enable myself to feel connected with a sense of empathy to the subject that I am aiming to explore. The relationship with music I would prefer natural sounds, or as another metaphor, I enjoy hill walking feeling the ground beneath my feet and breeze on my face. I value dark adaption, electronic devices rob you of this, subtlety gaining observing skills, learning to see more both with direct and averted vision. Perhaps this technology of electronic assisted observing has parameters that just maybe our natural sense of vision is more attuned to detect. Amateur astronomy can be a broad church and if you like computer games and photography, it may be understandable that electronic assisted observing might appeal. 

[cuivenion]

Apologies scarp15 I should have said using cameras for EAA rather than electronic aids. It's that and Goto that seem to draw the most criticism. I'm certainly not saying that EAA should or can replace eyepiece observing, but it is a viable way of observing  in its own right with its own set of skills to learn. There just seems to be a vibe of EAA not being "proper astronomy" in certain posts and topics which has always annoyed me.

That being said eyepiece observing is very enjoyable and definitely a skill learned over time.

[scarp15]

It is a viable way for observing you are quite right, there is no absolute definitive approach. Astronomy clubs are good to become involved with in terms of cameras etc, less good if you are exclusively an eyepiece observer, it can be difficult to become fully dark adapted and a reason I stopped attending club dark sky meets to go on solo dark sky sessions. Just wondering if there ought to be a dedicated section for night vision and similar, comments responding to a few reports seem to not understand this technology in comparison to eyepiece use. 

[ollypenrice]

19 hours ago, Paul73 said:

I’m one of the Luddites who gets a kick out of hunting down a target and soaking up the actual photons which have made it across unimaginable vast distances and into my Mk1.

 

Paul

Quantum theory might not agree with the bit about 'the actual photons' but the point remains a good one!

Olly

[glynnlondon]

18 hours ago, Louis D said:

I just thought of another advantage to remote observing from the comfort of your air conditioned home here in Texas: no mosquito swarms draining your body of blood (?‍♂️) during the summer months while you drip sweat onto your eyepieces.?  There are some clear, summer nights here that are just so dreadfully hot and sticky that I can't bring myself to go outside with a telescope and suffer.

 

[John]

Someone I know invested in a similar instrument that was being developed through crowdfunding. It too looked interesting but the project has recently collapsed. Apparently they decided that there was not enough of a market for the device after all

Personally I don't have a problem at all with this sort of application of technology if such devices encourage more people to take an interest in the night sky and to value it if it's under threat through light pollution etc.

My astro society is going down a similar route with the new scope that they have installed recently (12 Meade LX600). It's going to be connected to all sorts of gizmos etc to deliver a more exciting experience to visitors, especially the younger generation.

As someone recently said when I was last at the observatory, I may be the last member that knows their way around the sky without the aid of technology. I hope they were joking !

[PeterW]

NV works very well, real-time. Limited field of view, sometimes green, but transforms urban observing. The rapid imaging EEA is a bit close to imaging for me, might as well hit the internet for images.

However I still have a desire to do wide angle two-eyed viewing. Moving about, finding things, seeing how they fit together, not using Goto. Bit like walking around London, rather than popping up at stations, seeing the bigger picture.

PEter

[Cosmic Geoff]

I imagine that EAA and tablets etc will become increasingly popular, but not replace visual observation. I'm told that professional astronomers rarely look through an eyepiece these days, so looking through an eyepiece and seeing real sky has become the province of the amateurs, a satisfaction not to be deprecated.

I do note a Luddite edge in comments about GoTo, as if for some it's not real astronomy if you don't do it the hard, 19th century way. This despite the overwhelming advantage and convenience of GoTo (when it works properly.) Well, each to their own...

One notes that the majority of newbies now express an interest in astrophotography and a lot of them will already have some of the necessary tech in the form of DSLR cameras, smartphones, laptops etc - stuff few people owned decades ago. With smartphones anybody can be an imager (of sorts).

I'd rather look through an eyepiece than at a screen, so long as the eyepiece view is better or easier to set up, but I was pleasantly surprised at some results from a camera + laptop screen: planetary nebulae looking blue, and stars E and F of the trapezium showing up on screen when I could not see them in the eyepiece.

I'd also like to mention the power of an observing list hooked up to a GoTo mount: with Nexstar Observer List I found I could select a double star and slew to it in seconds, then have a look in the eyepiece and tick it as observed. Brilliant (when it all works), and vastly quicker than trying to find them without electronic aid.

[PeterW]

Goto is a life saver, especially with starsense that can autoalign itself without needing the pole star under heavy light pollution. I had an enjoyable evening once comparing globulars, jumping between them with the mount. Depends what your aim is for the session. Different people want different things at different times.

 

peter

[TSRobot]

Hoping that the Evscope is no hoax. It's all tech, but then most of everything I touch is tech. Have paid up for the Evscope anyhow. Nothing arriving till June they say. 

Pick and choose tech as you like. Choice is human, not tech.

[RobertI]

It’s interesting that in that whole video they only show one object through the scope - M42, probably the brightest DS object in the sky. Why not show some more? Is it because they don’t look very impressive? I just don’t think this scope (or any similar products) will show enough objects with a wow factor to be worth the price.....yet! But I would love to be proved wrong. Ultimately I think this type of viewing will become very popular as the tech gets better and better. Unless the cost of NV comes down of course, which gives the best of both worlds. 

Of course I know nothing, I predicted the CD would never take off! ?

[Alien 13]

28 minutes ago, RobertI said:

Of course I know nothing, I predicted the CD would never take off! ?

You were partly correct with that one, it did succeed but failed to live up to its "indestructible" promise and never replaced vinyl , I for one only used it for convenience as the sound quality was dire.. 

Alan

[Louis D]

6 hours ago, RobertI said:

It’s interesting that in that whole video they only show one object through the scope - M42, probably the brightest DS object in the sky. Why not show some more? Is it because they don’t look very impressive? I just don’t think this scope (or any similar products) will show enough objects with a wow factor to be worth the price.....yet! But I would love to be proved wrong. Ultimately I think this type of viewing will become very popular as the tech gets better and better. Unless the cost of NV comes down of course, which gives the best of both worlds. 

Of course I know nothing, I predicted the CD would never take off! ?

Given the number of Millennials forgoing car ownership in favor of Uber rides, I stand by my supposition that the future of amateur astronomy lies in telescopes on demand available at the touch of an app.  Within that paradigm, the telescopes could be much larger and the sensors more sensitive than possible for the average casual telescope owner, and be located in great dark sky sites.

Literally no Millennials buy CDs and few buy vinyl.  Almost all stream their music.

[RobertI]

28 minutes ago, Louis D said:

Given the number of Millennials forgoing car ownership in favor of Uber rides, I stand by my supposition that the future of amateur astronomy lies in telescopes on demand available at the touch of an app.  Within that paradigm, the telescopes could be much larger and the sensors more sensitive than possible for the average casual telescope owner, and be located in great dark sky sites.

Literally no Millennials buy CDs and few buy vinyl.  Almost all stream their music.

Interesting observation Louis. As an EAA’er myself, I must admit  I have considered looking at whether some of these remote telescopes could provide a ‘live viewing experience’. Just not sure, wondering whether it would be a bit like the difference between catching a fish and looking at a picture of a fish! Just not quite the same sense of achievement! ? 

[Chris]

1 hour ago, RobertI said:

Just not sure, wondering whether it would be a bit like the difference between catching a fish and looking at a picture of a fish! Just not quite the same sense of achievement! ? 

This is the thing! We can all look at Hubble images with a click of the mouse, but a lot of the satisfaction comes from getting out there yourself, and obtaining the image for yourself. I'm not sure if asking a tech at a remote large scope to image a target and transfer the data to you would give you even remotely the same sense of achievement (I know a lot of scopes are automated, but there must be a tech overseeing everything?)

 Well I should say it's like this for me at least.

[Ags]

Not for me. Looking at M42 with that gadget would be less satisfying than merely googling far superior images. Imagine standing there half-blinded by the tablet, not really knowing where the telescope is pointing precisely... it would just be another image on the tablet from who knows where. How do you even know it is displaying the actual object and not one from a database, and would it make a difference either way? Going from target to target would be about as engaging as flipping channels on the TV. The device seems soul-destroying to me, to be honest.

[Chris]

10 minutes ago, Ags said:

Not for me. Looking at M42 with that gadget would be less satisfying than merely googling far superior images. Imagine standing there half-blinded by the tablet, not really knowing where the telescope is pointing precisely... it would just be another image on the tablet from who knows where. How do you even know it is displaying the actual object and not one from a database, and would it make a difference either way? Going from target to target would be about as engaging as flipping channels on the TV. The device seems soul-destroying to me, to be honest.

I like swapping a camera in and out with the eyepiece for a spot of EAA, but me too Ags, this is just one step too far removed for me also. Like you say! you could just google better images. The enjoyment is the skill in achieving something!

[Ags]

Just a thought... I doubt this gives very good views of the Moon or planets.

[Chris]

18 minutes ago, Ags said:

Just a thought... I doubt this gives very good views of the Moon or planets.

It looks like a fast scope for imaging, so I bet not, although my little 100p f/4 isn't that bad on the Moon. 

[Ags]

Unless it has a zoom function, Saturn would look like a dot. And if it does have a zoom function I wouldn't be surprised if it was only a digital zoom and not an optical zoom.

[munirocks]

Every time my wife and I go by Windsor Castle we share the same running joke. At the statue of Queen Victoria one of us will say, “Is that Queen Victora?” And the other answers, “No, it’s just a statue of Queen Victoria.”
Now, when looking at a picture of M31 on a screen, is that M31? No, it’s just a picture of M31. If you want to look at picture of M31 on a screen you might just as well stay home and look at a better hand-tweaked, stacked, long-exposure photograph on t’internet. However, if you want to see the real M31 you can look through an eyepiece, and use your retina to personally intercept photons that left M31 and started their journey through space 2.5 million years when our ancestors decided to come down from the trees more often.

To me it’s analogous to looking at paintings on-line or in a book, as opposed to standing in front of the actual painting in a museum and seeing the fine texture on the paint that was last touched by the artist themselves. It’s not the same experience to me, not by a long shot.