What really is EEVA

[Xilman]

5 minutes ago, PeterW said:

I am very happy to discuss and very keen for people to go try stuff out, don’t just do what others have before, that’s how we discover new and better ways of doing things.

 

Hallelujah!  Someone who really gets it!

When it comes to observing, by all means take the 45,000th image of the Orion Nebula, the Andromeda galaxy or the Pleiades while you are learning your trade.  Thereafter (and during it for that matter) seek out the less often observed and do something which distinguishes you from the common herd. Galaxy clusters, perhaps, or extragalactic globular clusters, or non-Gallilean satellites of Jupiter, or asteroids, or ...

Life is supposed to be somewhat hard, IMAO. An easy life is a boring life. Do something which is a challenge!

[PeterW]

Challenge, possibly, maybe just the path less trodden. Whatever floats your boat. If everything was all or nothing then we might as well give up as there’s usually always be someone better out there.

Maybe dive in and become an expert at one thing or a Jack of all trades..... 

Peter

PS looks like we’ve got all philosophic....

[Moonshed]

22 minutes ago, Xilman said:

Hallelujah!  Someone who really gets it!

When it comes to observing, by all means take the 45,000th image of the Orion Nebula, the Andromeda galaxy or the Pleiades while you are learning your trade.  Thereafter (and during it for that matter) seek out the less often observed and do something which distinguishes you from the common herd. Galaxy clusters, perhaps, or extragalactic globular clusters, or non-Gallilean satellites of Jupiter, or asteroids, or ...

Life is supposed to be somewhat hard, IMAO. An easy life is a boring life. Do something which is a challenge!

I totally agree with you how it can be both rewarding and interesting to take on new challenges, to test yourself and do something new and different. 

However, in this instance, for the vast majority of us that would require the upgrading of our kit to something more sophisticated and larger, meaning more expensive, and certainly the night vision equipment shown previously would be beyond my reach and I would suggest beyond the financial reach of a substantial number of SGL members.

Because of financial limitations imposed on many of us, while we would dearly love to be able to “seek out the less observed” we are nonetheless unable to fulfil that wish and instead have to satisfy ourselves by taking that “45,000th image of the Orion Nebula”. For you to suggest that this in itself means we are merely part of “the common herd” is, to my mind at least, both truly offensive and thoughtless. 
 

We are not all able to afford all the equipment we would wish to have but that alone does not give you the right to adopt your somewhat condescending tone. Perhaps that was unintentional on your part, you may have been trying to make a point but had not thought it through and appreciated how it could be taken. I can only hope that is the case.

[Xilman]

13 minutes ago, Moonshed said:

I totally agree with you how it can be both rewarding and interesting to take on new challenges, to test yourself and do something new and different. 

However, in this instance, for the vast majority of us that would require the upgrading of our kit to something more sophisticated and larger, meaning more expensive, and certainly the night vision equipment shown previously would be beyond my reach and I would suggest beyond the financial reach of a substantial number of SGL members.

 

Asteroids start at naked eye visibility. Several can be picked up with an unassisted smartphone.

How many here observe asteroids?

Edited December 29, 2020 by Xilman

[Moonshed]

3 minutes ago, Xilman said:

Asteroids start at naked eye visibility. Several can be picked up with an unassisted smartphone.

How many here observe asteroids?

I was clearly wrong to assume you did not intend to be condescending.

[Xilman]

5 minutes ago, Moonshed said:

I was clearly wrong to assume you did not intend to be condescending.

As you wish.

Nonetheless my question is a serious one.

I know a number of people in the BAA who observe asteroids and I have contributed myself..  How many people on SGL do so?

With the kit described in your signature you could undoubtedly do first rate original research which would be publishable in professional journals. Fancy trying it?

Edited December 29, 2020 by Xilman

[Xilman]

3 minutes ago, Xilman said:

With the kit described in your signature you could undoubtedly do first rate original research which would be publishable in professional journals. Fancy trying it?

Some of the best photometry of the most recent eclipse of epsilon Aurigae was taken by a guy with a 10cm reflector. His work was acknowedged in the astronomical literature.

It's not the size of your kit, it's how you use it that is important.

[callump]

On 28/12/2020 at 07:45, nicoscy said:

EAA is viewing without an eyepiece, doing any enhancements available in real time and while one is observing (applying calibration frames real time, tweaking software display options, cooling etc). Anything done to the actual image after observing (post processing) is considered imaging.

I think this is one area where I diverge and disagree with the CN position - and I am glad that here on SGL there is a more liberal and inclusive approach. 

With my INDI ecosystem I have still to find a suitable live stacking and image manipulation piece of software that is convenient for me to use (until perhaps @Martin Meredith puts it into Jocular!). So I end up stacking, registering, etc the next day when I can use a big screen that helps with my eye-sight problems. I am not really sure why it makes a big difference whether you do this at the telescope, live on the night (when you might be tired and cold), or the next day. I am not advocating whole-sale image-enhancement that can be done with some tools. But surely it won't be very long until someone integrates an artificial intelligence image-processing system into a live capture tool, and then you would not know the difference. And provided people are open and up-front about the steps taken - why not.

To my mind it is the observing experience that is the thing - which is similar to visual observing (which was my main interest). So short exposures, detection at the limits, observing things that others do not, and thinking/ researching what you are actually looking at.

Callum

 

[Xilman]

15 minutes ago, Xilman said:

With the kit described in your signature you could undoubtedly do first rate original research which would be publishable in professional journals. Fancy trying it?

A search on the term "Exoclock" might provide some inspiration on how anyone with a 150mm reflector and a camera can do valuable research and get their name into the professional literature.

[Moonshed]

You posted remarks that I found offensive and I said so.

Your  reply was to highlight the part of your comments that mentioned asteroids. This is taken well out of context, you were talking about observing “Galaxy clusters, perhaps, or extragalactic globular clusters, or non-Gallilean satellites of Jupiter, or asteroids, or ...” And let’s not forget the topic of this thread is EEVA.

Anyway, I have said all I intend to say on the matter, I have no wish to engage in a debate about limited financial resources and the type of telescopes we would all like to have with someone who has homes in both Cambridge and  La Palma, we live in different worlds. I think you have lost the ability to appreciate how much of a struggle life can be for so many less fortunate than yourself.

I will leave it there.

[nicoscy]

I am not claiming that the CN approach is the best. What I mentioned is that it was the most workable we could find.

I am not trying to be controversial, but stacking the next day means you just got the data one night and viewed it the next day, so it is not close to live. My 2c and feel free to ignore.

The point of amateur observational astronomy is to actually observe. How it is done is up to each person...

[Macavity]

Re. "More unusual" object selection, I did find the (Steve) O'Meara visual guides useful.
Selected from several "lists" and (imo) has "nice logical" approach - Albeit originally re.
Visual Observation. Anyway, it's over 400 objects (four volumes) to be going on with. 🙃

[andrew s]

It can be whatever you want it to be. The more important something is to you the harder it is to pin down and the more passionate the disputes. 

What's a Farm? Even the US government could not pin that one down. Does an allotment count? A small holding?  You get the idea.

It's a hobby enjoy.

Regards Andrew 

[Xilman]

2 hours ago, Moonshed said:

You posted remarks that I found offensive and I said so.

Your  reply was to highlight the part of your comments that mentioned asteroids. This is taken well out of context, you were talking about observing “Galaxy clusters, perhaps, or extragalactic globular clusters, or non-Gallilean satellites of Jupiter, or asteroids, or ...”

 

I will leave it there.

"'SCOPE: Celestron 8" SCT. MOUNT: Bresser Exos 2 EQ5. CAMERA:  ZWO ASI 224MC colour +Canon 1100D. PoleMaster. Electric Focus. Flip-Mirror. Assorted EPs, Filters. PhotoShop. Overdraft!"

Let's see. With that equipment your limiting stellar magnitude is going to be around 19.5 to 20, depending on for how long you integrate. Dozens of GCs in each of M33 and M81 are in the range 17-20. The brightest in M31 is Mayall II, at 13.7, and dozens more are in range of your scope.  I have not looked for Mayall II visually but I have seen Pluto 14.0 through an 11" in light-polluted central Oxford. The brightest of the SagDEG globulars, M54, appears in Messier's catalogue.

There are numerous Abell clusters whose brightest members are 12-14th magnitude. Have you considered taking many images of the Virgo cluster and stitching them together to get an overall view of what is out there? Remember that many of them were discovered  visually by Messier using the equivalent of a modern 60mm refractor. Ditto the Leo groups with their brightest members in Messier's catalogue.

Several Jovian satellites are brighter than 19th magnitude, some significantly so.

Stuff I didn't mention include open clusters. To give just one example, NGC 1746 is a delightful cluster in Taurus and easily visible in binoculars though it seems to be barely known at large. How many people here have seen it?

Set your sights higher and do something challenging!

Edited December 29, 2020 by Xilman
Add omitted "in".

[Moonshed]

14 minutes ago, Xilman said:

"'SCOPE: Celestron 8" SCT. MOUNT: Bresser Exos 2 EQ5. CAMERA:  ZWO ASI 224MC colour +Canon 1100D. PoleMaster. Electric Focus. Flip-Mirror. Assorted EPs, Filters. PhotoShop. Overdraft!"

Let's see. With that equipment your limiting stellar magnitude is going to be around 19.5 to 20, depending on for how long you integrate. Dozens of GCs in each of M33 and M81 are in the range 17-20. The brightest in M31 is Mayall II, at 13.7, and dozens more are in range of your scope.  I have not looked for Mayall II visually but I have seen Pluto 14.0 through an 11" in light-polluted central Oxford. The brightest of the SagDEG globulars, M54, appears in Messier's catalogue.

There are numerous Abell clusters whose brightest members are 12-14th magnitude. Have you considered taking many images of the Virgo cluster and stitching them together to get an overall view of what is out there? Remember that many of them were discovered  visually by Messier using the equivalent of a modern 60mm refractor. Ditto the Leo groups with their brightest members in Messier's catalogue.

Several Jovian satellites are brighter than 19th magnitude, some significantly so.

Stuff I didn't mention include open clusters. To give just one example, NGC 1746 is a delightful cluster in Taurus and easily visible in binoculars though it seems to be barely known at large. How many people here have seen it?

Set your sights higher and do something challenging!

I do what I find to be relaxing and enjoyable, I do it for myself. I don’t tell you or anyone else what they should be looking at or doing.

I am perfectly aware of the capabilities of my ‘scope, I’ve had it almost 30 years. I am also perfectly well aware of what is in the sky and I am capable of reading catalogues.

Move on, let it go, I’m really not interested in continuing this debate and thought I had made that clear. Have you nothing better to do?

GOODBYE

 

[vlaiv]

4 hours ago, GavStar said:

I think some night vision discussion on sgl even with the existing few practioners on a separate nv forum would be better than the current virtual zero nv discussion that happens on the eeva forums. A separate forum might also prompt more people to consider trying nv.

I don't think that separate forum will overcome ~£5000 worth of trouble of trying NV for most people.

[bomberbaz]

Gentlemen please. I started this thread to become more informed and confirm some ongoing ideas I had as well as stimulate debate in a friendly manner. 

Let us not start falling out with each other. It isn't in either the spirit of the time of year nor the interests of our community.