How far we have come

[Zermelo]

I was just culling my book collection and came across this in the pages of one of them:

 

There is no date given for the image, but the book was published in 1989.

It's amazing to compare this "good" photograph from a two-metre instrument of yesteryear with ones posted in this forum, taken with scopes down to 150mm aperture or even less. 

 

 

[Robindonne]

Dont know if the original image was bad or the printing of that book.  But indeed😍 they made a huge step

[Jonny_H]

We have certainly come a long long way. 

I think technology has advanced extensively and has allowed amateur AP'ers to take very nice photos indeed of DSO's, planets etc....this with instruments a fraction of the size of the ones that only professional AP'ers could use and take photos back then.

I think that makes sense....i've been up since 4am! 🤔😊

Edited July 29, 2021 by Jonny_H

[Gfamily]

It's mostly the software that allows multiple images to be stacked that makes the difference.  

This is what allows individual frames in a stream to be assessed for quality,and thus the best x% of frames to be stacked.  Then, using wavelet processing to apply Fourier processing to sharpen the image. 

Yes, the quantum efficiency of our imaging devices has improved,  but for planetary,  i would say that 70's film tech was  perfectly adequate, so it's the stacking that makes the difference. 

Edited July 29, 2021 by Gfamily

[Ouroboros]

We certainly have come long way.  It’s always dangerous to say what I am about to suggest but are we approaching a limit to what amateur astronomers are likely to be able to achieve? 

[Astro Noodles]

4 minutes ago, Ouroboros said:

We certainly have come long way.  It’s always dangerous to say what I am about to suggest but are we approaching a limit to what amateur astronomers are likely to be able to achieve? 

I don't think we are anywhere near the limit, or even if there is one. Technology is advancing at an amazing rate and quality equipment is increasingly affordable. What is cutting edge now will be widely available in a few years time (adaptive optics technology for example). By then, something else will be cutting edge. New materials will become available, computers will become more powerful, software will become better and better. 

There will of have to be changes and there will be problems to overcome. Starlink et al will make long exposure imaging more difficult, increased light pollution etc.

How long will it be before the first amateur astronomer takes his Takahashi up with Bezos or Branson for a better view?

[Paul M]

When I returned to active astronomy in 2013 after a long hiatus I too was shocked at just how far amateur imaging had moved on.

When I left, digital cameras were not really much good even for every day use. People were still hand guiding on Tec Pan 2415 film and getting results that would be an embarrassed to post these days.

One of my favourite books back in the day was Digital Universe by David Malin. A coffee table tome of world class astro imagery. Now days SGL could publish a similar collection of member's images!

[Shimrod]

My first foray into night time photography (and later AP) was with ISO 1600 film in Canon SLRs. Horrible grainy pictures that bear no relation to the ISO1600 (or indeed 6400) settings you get on digital cameras today. Expensive to shoot and develop, and days before you could see what you have taken. I never got a decent astro photograph, and while some of the nightscapes bring back memories of holidays, they are a long way from being good enough to share with other people!

Of course I then went on to try a Meade DSI (probably the first 'affordable' astro camera) on an LX90 which really killed my attempts at AP until a couple of years ago when I bought some new kit.

[City9Town0]

I remember shooting a roll of Konica high ISO with a Chinon CE4S...I'm guessing at remembering here... 2400 ISO? Grain like golf balls... in the early-mid eighties... aiming at Halley... I missed! But I loved that camera... my first SLR after an Instamatic bought with pocket money.

[Alien 13]

The thing that gets me is that most of the old images taken on photographic plates even with the 200 inch scope have similar content regarding image scale etc as a 70 mm APO with a modern sensor, I expect in 10 years our mobile phones will match or better what we can achieve now even hand held.

Alan

[saac]

I think the internet itself has done more than any improvement in equipment to popularise astronomy.   I mean compare how readily available information is now compared to pre internet days. You tube alone and the amazing attitude people have in sharing knowledge and skills alone is a gift beyond measure. 

Jim 

[Astro Noodles]

You can even get one of these now if you have a few grand and can't be bothered to learn how to do it properly.

[Alien 13]

7 minutes ago, Astro Noodles said:

You can even get one of these now if you have a few grand and can't be bothered to learn how to do it properly.

I want one so bad, its the future I am afraid..

Alan

[Ags]

Those things are not my cup of tea. I would be so divorced from the process of observing (or even from the process of imaging) I might as well look at APODs on my laptop. They might be the future, but not my future anyway!

Edited July 31, 2021 by Ags

[Astro Noodles]

No, I don't want one either. I enjoy the learning process and am not one of those people who get bored if they don't get instant results. 

But, I do understand that it produces images better than anything I have yet been able to achieve.😒

Edited July 31, 2021 by Astro Noodles

[Ags]

Going back to the original photo, back in those days it seems visual observers could go a lot deeper than the best photographs, at least for solar system objects. I've had sharper views with Mak 102!

Edited July 31, 2021 by Ags

[saac]

I wouldn't say no if one were going cheep - it is to casual visual observation what the mobile phone was to the land line .    I've no need to feel connected just connected .

Jim