Should Night Vision Have its own Section?

[PeterW]

BTW when’s the next Mob outing, this is the Deep Sky forum.... lets focus on what we can see and how.

Peter

[GavStar]

2 hours ago, mapstar said:

 

Just in case no one has read this (I see all the above NV users posting in here) then I have pasted it in. 

Cloudy nights take on it 

EAA FORUM RULES   1) This forum is for the discussion of observing - and related images captured - with Electronically Assisted Astronomy (EAA) equipment. Also, the discussion of the EAA hardware and software, and how to use it for various applications such as outreach events.  

2) Electronically Assisted Astronomy (EAA) is the use of a digital image capturing device replacing or augmenting the eyepiece for live viewing at the telescope.  

3) Images of any amount of total integration time are permitted here, whether for the purposes of augmenting your descriptions of your live viewing sessions, illustrating your EAA equipment's capabilities, or getting assistance with technical issues. However, post-processing of these images is not allowed under any circumstances.  

4) Posts with images must include total integration time and the software/process used for the “live” capture in their text. Those that do not conform will be removed without notice. Additional information to illustrate your techniques and equipment used, to assist other members, is encouraged and appreciated.  

5) Tell the viewers the name or catalog number of the object(s) of interest in each image.

 

Cloudynights is very comfortable with NV users posting in the general deep sky observing section and several NV users do.

I also would like to read more reports from you and other big dob users so please don’t stop. I have a newly acquired 16 inch dob that I will be using normal eyepieces with so I am looking for tips and targets. ?

[mapstar]

1 hour ago, Stu said:

I cannot afford this technology any more than you can, but I don't feel it putting me off regular observing in any way.

I can only encourage you to continue to post your valued reports Damian.

As I said it's not that I cant afford it Stu as I could buy the best out there, but there are very few on this forum that can say they have put more into being a visual observer than me. 

1 hour ago, Littleguy80 said:

There are still lots of people posting traditional reports and these are the ones that inspire me the most. I would love to see more from you and Calvin. 

For me, NV isn’t a threat to traditional observing. 

I agree on both accounts Neil and as I said it is a form of observing just different from what I and most other people do.  In no way would I discourage or dissuade anyone from doing it if thats how they wish to observe.

Thank goodness for traditional posts though and just as an example I read Cotterless Nicks posts with awe and Inspiration and admire them for the depth of detail and knowledge he conveys. 

And with that I'm done. Cheers all happy observing. 

[Stu]

7 minutes ago, mapstar said:

but there are very few on this forum that can say they have put more into being a visual observer than me

Can you let me know when I or anyone else questioned that Damian? I believe I posted support on your mirror grind thread amongst others for what it is worth and actually would love to see more reports from you and Steve.

Why does having NV posts from enthusiastic observers undermine the great posts from the likes of Nick? I just don't get it.

[Paul73]

Is there a thread that sets out clearly, the strengths & weaknesses of NV? On some targets, it rules. Others? Less so.

Yes. I found it faintly annoying, given the hours that I put into bagging the HH, to see a casual a smart phone snap of the HH from cantral London!!! But, I could have bought a bigger scope / gone to darker sky. I chose not to. Choosing to allocate my energy & resources differently. Surely this constitutes a lack of effort on my part?

NV gear is genuinely pricy. So I’m guessing that sacrifices have been made by those choosing to go the NV route. So apparently casual smart phone snap was a long long time in the making, but nobody wants to read about those sacrifices. However we love a big Dob build thread, where 100s of hours of patient work have also lead to a view of faint nebula inaccessible to most of us. 

Respecting others choices is pretty basic stuff.

To the NV Guys : I apologise for getting irritated.  I hadn’t thought it through. I didn’t post of this annoyance because I enjoyed the enthusiasm of the report and the pictures. I’m Re-Reading, and enjoying, the NV observing reports with new eyes. Keep posting! It would be handy if they were in one place though ?.

Paul

Ps. I guess the ultimate situation is Dark Sky, Really big scope & NV!

[GavStar]

10 minutes ago, Paul73 said:

Is there a thread that sets out clearly, the strengths & weaknesses of NV? On some targets, it rules. Others? Less so.

?Here you go Paul

https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/307103-where-night-vision-tech-works-and-where-it-doesn’t/

[PeterW]

Really FAST scope, dark skies, chroma filter and harder NV..... currently the best option we’re aware of.

Peter

[Paul73]

1 hour ago, PeterW said:

BTW when’s the next Mob outing, this is the Deep Sky forum.... lets focus on what we can see and how.

Peter

Steve & Clav made it to Wales last weekend (rain & storm force wind = retreat to the pub). The consensus was that two, despite their best efforts, does not constitute a mob.

Paul

[Steve]

12 hours ago, Littleguy80 said:

The mods decision seems fair enough to me. NV is still in its infancy on SGL and perhaps does not yet warrant its own section. Rules are always open to review and change as things evolve and change. 

That sums up our position perfectly ?‍♂️

We are fortunate there are so many ways to observe (figuratively speaking) the night sky. 

[Macavity]

4 hours ago, mapstar said:

Cloudy nights take on it 

3) ... However, post-processing of these images is not allowed under any circumstances.  

Rulz is rulz! [teasing] ?

As one of the early uptake of "EAA" (discovered accidentally & independently of "forums")
using the original Watec "internal hardware stacking" I found myself excluded by the above.
To make "half-decent" images I had to stack the stacked images and also post-process! ?

The quality of (current) EAA images has increased notably with real-time software stacking
... and this has come to (quite reasonably) dominate EAA now? Under the strict CN rules, I
could I suppose post on any (classical) imaging forum, but there would be no audience? ?

Actually THAT is not strictly true... But various imaging genres (Oer!) are motivated slightly
differently? Classical imagers mostly seem want to produce ever better images of a subset
of objects, so selection of an unusual TARGET might still leave me *some* possibilities!? ?

But I am reminded that (even after many years here!) a LOT of "names" (and their work)
is totally unfamiliar to me. The curse of of a generalist to be unknown everywhere? lol.

But I also have a faith that most Amateur Astronomers (like professional scientists) are
not out to "cheat" or deliberately violate the rules. The latter are usually applied with a
greater discretion and flexibility here? And provided you "clearly show your workings"? ?

Personally, I find I am also getting close to the number of sub-forums I can remember!
I ain't that bovvered where things go, but I do hope that they don't become invisible...

[estwing]

2 hours ago, Stu said:

Why does having NV posts from enthusiastic observers undermine the great posts from the likes of Nick? I just don't get it.

But why are NV post allowed in a observing section? Imaging has a section, video, sketching etc...the simple solution to keep everyone happy would be a dedicated NV thread. 

Surly it can't be that hard to set up and moderate one more section...

[Stu]

15 minutes ago, estwing said:

But why are NV post allowed in a observing section? Imaging has a section, video, sketching etc...the simple solution to keep everyone happy would be a dedicated NV thread. 

Surly it can't be that hard to set up and moderate one more section...

The point is that it is an embryonic niche with few contributors and is a valid form of observing so there is no reason why it can't coexist quite happily. Sinular targets are observed by Gavin, Peter and Alan as by say Gerry using traditional methods from his skies.

As Steve says, it will be monitored and if at some point it is decided to separate it off then that can happen. Actually our feelings are more about how we can keep people together rather than split them up so that has to be considered too.

[Steve]

11 minutes ago, estwing said:

Surly it can't be that hard to set up and moderate one more section...

It would not be difficult and we used to do that whenever requested but we have learned from experience that less is more, at least when it comes to forum discussion boards. If we make a NV discussion board now it would likely result in less people seeing it. Not more. 

[estwing]

That's all from me, Happy observing everyone. 

[scarp15]

11 hours ago, PeterW said:

I apologise for starting this whole issue off all those months/years ago..... should have seen it coming.

Peter

Absolutely not Peter, NV is innovative and it is integral, this thread is airing our views and working out how it fits in going forward. Those posts you had made about the Jellyfish got me working hard to try and view that darn thing. Cant say that I saw much but with scrutiny I can claim that I got it. NV has imposed itself, clarification is maybe required, now is the time for the forum members to come together and address this and at least lets face it, we will do a better job than Parliament. 

[Astro Imp]

I have read through this thread and found it interesting and informative.
I would be very sorry to find that the airing of views has resulted in any members feeling their contributions are not wanted or appreciated.

[iPeace]

I get the feeling I may not fully understand the purpose of observing reports. I've submitted a few, and have thankfully received appreciation for them - so I sort of thought I was on the right track. But now it seems there's some significance to them which I have missed.

I realize this may read as if I'm trying to make a point. Out of respect to all, I'm trying not to.

[Paul73]

Purpose of observing reports?

At worst : Lording superior kit / sky / bank balances / knowledge (take your pick) over the rest of us mere mortals.....

At best : Enthusiastic sharing of experiences and a few good target recommendations to boot!

We are very lucky that the vast majority of SGL observing reports are penned in the spirit of the second scenario.

I stay away from another well known forum because of the shouty one up manship style of some observing reports and subsequent threads (personal view based on a tiny sample of content).

Paul

 

[iPeace]

8 minutes ago, Paul73 said:

Lording superior kit / sky / bank balances / knowledge (take your pick) over the rest of us mere mortals.....

Goodness. I don't recall reading any of those. I can only hope none of mine have ever given rise to feelings of resentment or insecurity.

[John]

It must be frustrating to be a city / urban based astronomer who does not wish to or cannot travel regularly to dark skies so simply can't observe the fainter objects that many of us who have reasonably dark skies have access to and regularly discuss here. So if a method to assist with pursuing the hobby more fully under light polluted skies emerges that I'm not at all surprised that folks pursue this with some enthusiasm. I notice that they are also sharing the views with their equipment when possible with others through outreach and group viewing sessions which is great.

Currently the equipment required is quite expensive but it may well reduce and become more accessible over time and with more interest and uptake. Even if individuals cannot readily afford it, clubs and societies might be able to and the pathfinding work establishing proven setups will hopefully lead to more uptake and more growth within astronomy groups in light polluted areas.

None of this should detract from the fight against light pollution of course and does not detract one iota from the joy of being under a truly dark sky either with or without optical equipment.

 

[Astro Imp]

@Paul73  I think most of the/all the observing reports on SGL are written as per your second scenario.
I thoroughly enjoy the reports from all members, from most there is something to learn, be it a new target, what kit is needed and many other little pointers to improving my own observing skills. 
I consider we are very fortunate to have many members with vastly more experience than I have who are willing to share their knowledge in a helpful way without trying to show "one up-man-ship".

[Paul73]

 I couldn’t agree more!

[Stu]

Hear, hear @John

[GavStar]

28 minutes ago, John said:

Currently the equipment required is quite expensive but it may well reduce and become more accessible over time and with more interest and uptake. 

John, unfortunately I’ve just noticed that actinblack has increased its price for the Photonis 4g by over £1000...?

[scarp15]

17 minutes ago, Astro Imp said:

@Paul73  I think most of the/all the observing reports on SGL are written as per your second scenario.
I thoroughly enjoy the reports from all members, from most there is something to learn, be it a new target, what kit is needed and many other little pointers to improving my own observing skills. 
I consider we are very fortunate to have many members with vastly more experience than I have who are willing to share their knowledge in a helpful way without trying to show "one up-man-ship".

I do to and yet when certain reported claims cannot be checked or verified by others it can create detachment and potential questions that are difficult to verify. This is why in the recent NV focused reflection nebulae thread, a claim for an observation of the Witch Head nebula by a member was challenged and potentially discredited - is valid and important. Traditional observers can share and often verify with conviction reports and yes the majority of posts on SGL are completely credible in their full context / entirety and which also includes NV reporting, particularly when shared among the minority users.