The future of visual astronomy

[paulastro]

To suggest that there may be a time when visual observing will become a rare activity and astro imaging  will somehow take over is nonsense in my view.  There have always been more visual observers than imagers and there always will be.

It just seems there are more imagers than there are because they like to share their images with others and get have them onto websites, forums, magazines and other publications. Read AN and S@N mag and you will find many images of celestial subjects, but you won't won't see many pics of anyone actually observing the night sky.  You will also read many articles about how to take better images, or just pics to admire, but comparatively little about visual observing - and even then usually at a very basic level.

Read the classified ads on astro forums and the vast majority are items primarily for imaging.  This is because imagers need to spend so much money on all sorts of gear  unrelated to visual observing.

Most observers don't leave their trails and signs everywhere as imagers do so don't tend to get noticed.  There are many solitary visual observers who pursue their interest quietly and without fuss and  never go near any societies or forums.

There may seem to be a lot of imagers and few visual observers - but that's just how it seems.  Imagers are the noisy neighbours of the astronomical community - they are not the majority and never will be.

 

[Jules Tohpipi]

Personally, I think EAA sits closer in spirit to visual astronomy than it does AP.

Sure, the EAA images do come from a screen. Yet viewed in real time, while outside, from my own telescope. The images are far less polished than AP because of the real-time viewing and stacking. 

In my mind at least, out under the stars., it gives a passable impression of what I’d see looking through a 20 inch dob. 

I’m still new to EAA and finding it’s supplementing my long-term visual observations a treat. Thrilling even. Plus it takes only a moment to pop an eyepiece straight back into the diagonal.  

Edited August 19, 2023 by Jules Tohpipi

[PeterC65]

I agree with @Jules Tohpipi that EAA is experientially much closer to visual than it is to EAA.

The reason people classify EAA and AP together is because they share the same kit. If you have the kit for AP then you have all you need for EAA, although not the other way around. A visual astronomer on the other hand needs new kit to try EAA. But they only need a camera, assuming they already own a laptop. My first camera was second hand, costing £110, less than the cost of most of my eyepieces, and I bought it just in order to give EAA a whorl.

 

[ScouseSpaceCadet]

2 hours ago, paulastro said:

Imagers are the noisy neighbours of the astronomical community...

I had to laugh... 😄

There will always be stargazers. Despite encroaching light pollution I'm sure the hobby has never been more bouyant due to the plethora of easily accessible information, clubs, societies, forums Iike SGL and relatively cheap high quality gear. Astronomy is even now commonly taught in schools.

Real time mk.1 eyeball observing brings the universe alive like nothing else. Year by year watching the changing tilt of Saturn's rings, Jovian moons orbiting as you watch, the movement of the lunar terminator, every two years spending hours observing the rotation of Mars and so on. All these observations and many more really hit home we're part of a dynamic universe.

I'll only give up when I can't physically manage or the cold starts penetrating my old bones.

[PeterStudz]

2 hours ago, paulastro said:

To suggest that there may be a time when visual observing will become a rare activity and astro imaging  will somehow take over is nonsense in my view.  There have always been more visual observers than imagers and there always will be.

It just seems there are more imagers than there are because they like to share their images with others and get have them onto websites, forums, magazines and other publications. Read AN and S@N mag and you will find many images of celestial subjects, but you won't won't see many pics of anyone actually observing the night sky.  You will also read many articles about how to take better images, or just pics to admire, but comparatively little about visual observing - and even then usually at a very basic level.

Read the classified ads on astro forums and the vast majority are items primarily for imaging.  This is because imagers need to spend so much money on all sorts of gear  unrelated to visual observing.

Most observers don't leave their trails and signs everywhere as imagers do so don't tend to get noticed.  There are many solitary visual observers who pursue their interest quietly and without fuss and  never go near any societies or forums.

There may seem to be a lot of imagers and few visual observers - but that's just how it seems.  Imagers are the noisy neighbours of the astronomical community - they are not the majority and never will be.

 

I completely agree. Also the rise of social media where it’s easy to post a picture of, for example, Jupiter with not much more than a comment along the lines of “Jupiter, taken through I telescope from my back garden”.  I have yet to see a single observation report (with picture or without) on social media. And I don’t believe the majority of people on social media would be interested in that kind of thing. Social media is driven by image and pictures. But that doesn’t mean that there are more imagers than visual observers, or that visual observation is in decline without a future.

 

[GordonD]

This has been a good read on an interesting topic. I think @paulastro has an excellent point that visual observers don't leave a trail. 
I am happily doing visual and have played with a DSLR for AP and have tried a dedicated planetary recently so enjoying both is great. 

 

Edited August 19, 2023 by GordonD

[Ratlet]

I do visual and sketching for me and other amatuer astronomers.  AP is for everyone else.

[ONIKKINEN]

I think that visual astronomy, or at least the purely visual crowd will keep becoming more and more unpopular as time goes on because of what has been mentioned many times over in the thread already: Light pollution, and generally technology progressing to the point where most people have a pretty good camera in their pockets at all times and the whole ordeal generally getting easier and easier as time goes on. What i dont believe for a second is that the crowd will disappear completely, there is a certain charm to visual observing which I'm sure will always have its fans.

There is also the fact that those who started the hobby a few decades ago had no option to take images with their scopes, or at least not in the very easy way we do today with digital imaging. These veterans of the hobby are likely to keep doing what they have enjoyed for decades already, so probably feel no rush or allure to do astrophotography (as mentioned many times by several people in these threads). But those who start the hobby fresh today do have that option and i would argue most have a wish to take images of some kind through the telescope because they learned of the hobby by seeing an image posted somewhere in the internet. So in time the crowd will likely naturally evolve to be more astrophotography than visual (i will argue that it already is, even including the "silent observer" that does not post or talk about their adventures at the eyepiece online).

I am not purely imaging, however i am mostly so at maybe 90-95% of my efforts under the stars are imaging related. I personally find it significantly easier to enjoy the hobby through imaging, and significantly more time efficient too. That last part sounds odd to most of you (probably), but hear me out. Imaging takes research before going out, planning the night, setting up the gear, babysitting the setup while it works its magic and also a small portion of EEVA as i watch the images come in. Then the work does not end after the clouds reappear and the night ends, i get to process the image however long i want so in effect the 5 hours under the stars can turn into dozens of hours of time that i still equate to astronomy time. Then at the end of all that there is an image that i can look at whenever i want to and where ever i am.

With visual, the initial hurdle is a lot smaller in that i can simply put my telescope on an alt-az mount and be observing in a few minutes. But also the gains are much smaller in my opinion in that most objects are really just a puff of smoke in the eyepiece that takes some imagination and a certain type of mind to enjoy, which i do have and appreciate the views when considering that puff of smoke in the eyepiece spent potentially millions of years to reach my eye.

My most used visual instrument would be my Nikon Aculons, which are 7x50 binoculars. No setup time and couldn't be easier to use, so really no reason not to while the imaging rig is ticking.

Personally i am very interested in seeing nightvision hopefully become more affordable as time goes on. My idea of a perfect visual instrument would probably be some kind of image stabilized binocular system with night vision capabilities to make the best out of observing time.

[PeterW]

On 18/08/2023 at 10:33, DirkSteele said:

 

Sky and Telescope had an issue about 15 years ago with a cover photo of 10-year old girl hugging her dobsionian asking the question "where are all the young astronomers?"  Perhaps another cover story is coming in a few years..."where are all the astrophotographers?"

Bit longer than 15yrs, but seems she’s still observing, though with observing buddies like that and access to good skies who wouldn’t be?

https://www.astronomy-mall.com/Adventures.In.Deep.Space/whoswho.htm
I guess it depends on what you’re after and that will vary with time, age, finances, spare time etc. 

 

Peter

[GordonD]

10 hours ago, John said:

This film dates from 2009 but much of it chimes with me. It also features a few of folks from Bristol Astronomical Society including the very much missed Eddie Carpenter:

What a wonderful film- thanks for posting it 

[DirkSteele]

1 hour ago, PeterW said:

Bit longer than 15yrs, but seems she’s still observing, though with observing buddies like that and access to good skies who wouldn’t be?

https://www.astronomy-mall.com/Adventures.In.Deep.Space/whoswho.htm
I guess it depends on what you’re after and that will vary with time, age, finances, spare time etc. 

 

Peter

September 2000?! I feel old.

[JeremyS]

11 hours ago, John said:

This film dates from 2009 but much of it chimes with me. It also features a few of folks from Bristol Astronomical Society including the very much missed Eddie Carpenter:

 

Thanks John. I must have missed that first time round. I know/knew most of these people - some sadly no longer with us.

[paulastro]

2 hours ago, ONIKKINEN said:

I think that visual astronomy, or at least the purely visual crowd will keep becoming more and more unpopular as time goes on because of what has been mentioned many times over in the thread already: Light pollution, and generally technology progressing to the point where most people have a pretty good camera in their pockets at all times and the whole ordeal generally getting easier and easier as time goes on. What i dont believe for a second is that the crowd will disappear completely, there is a certain charm to visual observing which I'm sure will always have its fans.

There is also the fact that those who started the hobby a few decades ago had no option to take images with their scopes, or at least not in the very easy way we do today with digital imaging. These veterans of the hobby are likely to keep doing what they have enjoyed for decades already, so probably feel no rush or allure to do astrophotography (as mentioned many times by several people in these threads). But those who start the hobby fresh today do have that option and i would argue most have a wish to take images of some kind through the telescope because they learned of the hobby by seeing an image posted somewhere in the internet. So in time the crowd will likely naturally evolve to be more astrophotography than visual (i will argue that it already is, even including the "silent observer" that does not post or talk about their adventures at the eyepiece online).

I am not purely imaging, however i am mostly so at maybe 90-95% of my efforts under the stars are imaging related. I personally find it significantly easier to enjoy the hobby through imaging, and significantly more time efficient too. That last part sounds odd to most of you (probably), but hear me out. Imaging takes research before going out, planning the night, setting up the gear, babysitting the setup while it works its magic and also a small portion of EEVA as i watch the images come in. Then the work does not end after the clouds reappear and the night ends, i get to process the image however long i want so in effect the 5 hours under the stars can turn into dozens of hours of time that i still equate to astronomy time. Then at the end of all that there is an image that i can look at whenever i want to and where ever i am.

With visual, the initial hurdle is a lot smaller in that i can simply put my telescope on an alt-az mount and be observing in a few minutes. But also the gains are much smaller in my opinion in that most objects are really just a puff of smoke in the eyepiece that takes some imagination and a certain type of mind to enjoy, which i do have and appreciate the views when considering that puff of smoke in the eyepiece spent potentially millions of years to reach my eye.

My most used visual instrument would be my Nikon Aculons, which are 7x50 binoculars. No setup time and couldn't be easier to use, so really no reason not to while the imaging rig is ticking.

Personally i am very interested in seeing nightvision hopefully become more affordable as time goes on. My idea of a perfect visual instrument would probably be some kind of image stabilized binocular system with night vision capabilities to make the best out of observing time.

I initially wondered if this was meant to be a serious comment on the issue.

I didn't realise that visual observers were becoming  'unpopular' - I know some visual observers who have quite a few friends.

I suppose visual observers should also be grateful that 'there is a certain charm to visual observing'  - I m glad it has something going for it.

On a more serious note though, I am rather concerned that I am ' going to evolve to become more astrophotography than visual'.  What does this mean, square eyes to better use monitors, thinner fingers to tap the keyboard keys more effectively?

And 'imaging takes research before going out, planning the night' - and there was me thinking  visual observers just rush out at the sign of any clear sky and point the tesescope randomly at any object in the night sky.

Incredible!

Edited August 19, 2023 by paulastro
Typo

[ScouseSpaceCadet]

19 minutes ago, paulastro said:

...there was me thinking  visual observers just rush out at the sign of any clear sky and point the tesescope randomly at any object in the night sky.

Incredible!

Pointing at the moon while jumping up and down excitedly shouting 'ugh ugh!" is a vital part of my observing ritual. 😉

[paulastro]

1 minute ago, ScouseSpaceCadet said:

Pointing at the moon while jumping up and down excitedly shouting 'ugh ugh!" is a vital part of my observing ritual. 😉

I often talk to the Moon sometimes when I'm observing it, but please don't tell anyone else!

[saac]

31 minutes ago, paulastro said:

I initially wondered if this was meant to be a serious comment on the issue.

I didn't realise that visual observers were becoming  'unpopular' - I know some visual observers who have quite a few friends.

I suppose visual observers should also be grateful that 'there is a certain charm to visual observing'  - I m glad it has something going for it.

On a more serious note though, I am rather concerned that I am ' going to evolve to become more astrophotography than visual'.  What does this mean, square eyes to better use monitors, thinner fingers to tap the keyboard keys more effectively?

And 'imaging takes research before going out, planning the night' - and there was me thinking  visual observers just rush out at the sign of any clear sky and point the tesescope randomly at any object in the night sky.

Incredible!

Never mind Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg cage fighting, these visual v ap astronomy threads always make me giggle. Who would have thought we have such mild mannered seething tension out there under our dark skies. Stand up for original photons, let's hear it for quantum efficiency and something for err EAA whatever that is  

Jim 

Edited August 19, 2023 by saac

[paulastro]

2 minutes ago, saac said:

Never mind Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg cage fighting, these visual v ap astronomy threads always make me giggle. Who would have thought we have such mild mannered seething tension out there under our dark skies. Stand up for original photons, let's hear it for quantum efficiency and something for err EAA whatever that is  

Jim 

Jim 

Jim, I've asked my wife, and she says under no circumstances should I take up cage fighting. So sorry, but I can't participate 😔.

[ScouseSpaceCadet]

16 minutes ago, paulastro said:

I often talk to the Moon sometimes when I'm observing it, but please don't tell anyone else!

At least you're visual only and free from AP problems; tangled cables, crashing computers, fizzled PSUs and sausage fingers...

 

[saac]

Ok, I'm converted, pass me my HB and No 2H  pencils. 

Jim 

[John]

25 minutes ago, paulastro said:

I often talk to the Moon sometimes when I'm observing it, but please don't tell anyone else!

I wink at it. Twice actually. Once for Neil Armstrong (his family suggested this after he passed away in 2012) and once for Sir Patrick Moore who spent so much time studying it.

Silly I know, but there you go 

[ONIKKINEN]

1 hour ago, paulastro said:

I initially wondered if this was meant to be a serious comment on the issue.

I didn't realise that visual observers were becoming  'unpopular' - I know some visual observers who have quite a few friends.

I suppose visual observers should also be grateful that 'there is a certain charm to visual observing'  - I m glad it has something going for it.

On a more serious note though, I am rather concerned that I am ' going to evolve to become more astrophotography than visual'.  What does this mean, square eyes to better use monitors, thinner fingers to tap the keyboard keys more effectively?

And 'imaging takes research before going out, planning the night' - and there was me thinking  visual observers just rush out at the sign of any clear sky and point the tesescope randomly at any object in the night sky.

Incredible!

You managed to nicely deconstruct the entire comment. I'm sure you got my point, which is that over time i think imaging will keep getting more popular for a lot of reasons while observing less so.

My point for arguing that imaging is a better use of my time (not someone else's) was easy to understand, yet you managed to make this about yourself and twist my words to something i did not mean to say.

[RobertI]

I had a friend once who was obsessed by cranes (the construction kind, not the feathered kind), and was very knowledgeable about them. I asked him what fascinated him about cranes, and his response was “Rob, if you need to ask, you’ll never understand”. I can’t help feeling that visual astronomy, and the art of observing faint fuzzies, is very similar!  

[scarp15]

The mechanics of visual astronomy is attractive and appealing, yet it is quite understandable that the younger emerging generation do not necessarily embrace this, since any inclination and interest in astronomy will be facilitated by a phone app with perhaps some naked eye observing (such as the ISS passing over, a lunar eclipse, planetary alignment etc). It is also rather tragic and slightly pathetic when for example watching the local weather forecast on TV, the weather presenter may enthusiastically announce that there is a strong possibility of an aurora event this evening or that the Perseids meteor shower are to reach their peak, when almost all of their viewers live in a consistent environment awash with light pollution and will dismiss these remarks as something exotic that happens elsewhere - such is our conditioning to urban acceptance.  

Yet perhaps many visual observers are fairly solitary in this pursuit; enjoy the calm simplicity that visual astronomy can provide and do not give a fig about whether it has a future or not. 

[Roy Challen]

16 hours ago, Nik271 said:

On a positive note for visual astronomy, remember that unlike other type of pollution light pollution clears up quickly, it disappears the instant when the lights are off. It is by no means certain that in the future people will insist on keeping the lights on when not needed.  

Excellent point

[paulastro]

2 hours ago, RobertI said:

I had a friend once who was obsessed by cranes (the construction kind, not the feathered kind), and was very knowledgeable about them. I asked him what fascinated him about cranes, and his response was “Rob, if you need to ask, you’ll never understand”. I can’t help feeling that visual astronomy, and the art of observing faint fuzzies, is very similar!  

Excellent, well said. 

To me visual observing is actually experiencing the night sky, while  imaging is time spent obtaining a  picture of it, which however impressive is only a poor representative of the real thing.  It's a bit like reading  holiday brochures but never going on holiday.

It doesn't really matter as they are completely different activities so one being better than the other doesn't come into it for me.  

It's also not true there is somehow a 'natural' progression from  observing to imaging, indicating the former is superior in some way.  This myth is encouraged to some degree by magazines and astronomical retailers advertising very expensive imaging equipment.  It's a good business to be in - selling equipment most of which will soon be out if date or incompatable.  Indeed, apart from the telescope or lens used, if its kept long enough it becomes worthless.

A friend of mine, to counteract  jibes saying how superior imaging is responds that 'imagers are failed visual observers'.  I couldn't possibly comment.  🙂