Messier etiquette

[Nick P]

Just out of interest I was wondering what is the generally accepted etiquette for claiming a Messier object?

Is it a single observation, being able to find and observe on several occasions, or prove that the object has been studied such as a sketch / observation notes?

[brantuk]

I'll happily believe you if you told me you saw it irrespective of photos, drawings or notes. We all trust each other here and you'd have nothing to gain from fibbing lol

[Talitha]

If you can see it well enough to sketch it, i say go ahead and claim it.

Some Messiers are more difficult than others due to LP, seeing, and transparency, but if you're sure you got it, go ahead and log it in. I tend to be my own worst critic though, and demand three consecutive sightings in the same session before i allow myself the right to say "yes, i definitely saw it".

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

I agree with the above. I will accept any claim made by anyone in SGL or beyond. For myself I am quite strict in what I accept as a valid sighting, in particular for difficult ones. When in doubt I just say to myself: check it out under better conditions, and try some other time. Yesterday I got M97 (easy in my C8 with LP-filter) and M108 (more difficult). For the latter I checked three times that I could spot it (averted vision + LP filter), that it was in the correct location (a 16x70 finder is a boon there, because it will show the context more clearly, even if the object is invisible), and that it had the right shape (almost edge-on galaxy).

I tried M109 and M106, but they were still too low, and clouds started rolling in. I know I was in the right area for M109, but no dice.

Regarding M97: I must have spotted it in the distant past (just like many in Coma/Virgo), but did not log it. Therefore it does not count. Same holds for M4: must have got it, but did not log it.

The biggest problems in the Messier list are M40 (optical double) and M102 (most likely NGC 5866, but maybe double entry for M101). I have decided to go with the NGC 5866 option (still to be captured).

[John]

I can't understand why anyone would claim seeing anything that they had not actually seen ?. OK sometimes it's possible to be mistaken but thats just a genuine mistake.

It's a bit like cheating at patience card games - whats the point

It's not like it's a competition or anything

[jgs001]

I claimed M1 when I saw it in my Konus 80s... I spent ages confirming it was actually a tiny grey smudge in the sky, and not on the optics, but once that was done... I chalked it up as having seen it, if only barely

[bombassa]

I think making false claims is very strange.

Personally i'm not so interested in these objects anymore since I have already seen all 120 of them. I much prefer number 102 by the way.

Oh I'd better remember this one -

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

I think making false claims is very strange.

Personally i'm not so interested in these objects anymore since I have already seen all 120 of them. I much prefer number 102 by the way.

Oh I'd better remember this one -

So what were messier 111 to 120 like

[John]

Actually one thing that does bug me (but only a little ) is when an object just gets referred to by the constellation it's in, eg: M31 gets called just "Andromeda" and M42 "Orion" etc. I can see why knowing or remembering the Messier number is a pain but we perhaps should at least say "The Andromeda galaxy" or "the Orion nebula"

It's not a big issue really though

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

Actually one thing that does bug me (but only a little ) is when an object just gets referred to by the constellation it's in, eg: M31 gets called just "Andromeda" and M42 "Orion" etc. I can see why knowing or remembering the Messier number is a pain but we perhaps should at least say "The Andromeda galaxy" or "the Orion nebula"

It's not a big issue really though

Remembering Messier numbers is easy peasy: try remembering RA and Dec for all of them:eek:

[acey]

Astronomy's a hobby, not a sport. There are no rules, and no prizes to be claimed, other than personal satisfaction.

[John]

Remembering Messier numbers is easy peasy: try remembering RA and Dec for all of them:eek:

Remembering that for ANY of them would be an achievement

I just use the "it's sort of there and up a bit" approach

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

Remembering that for ANY of them would be an achievement

I just use the "it's sort of there and up a bit" approach

I never remember any of the coordinates, and don't have go to, so for me it is always a matter of star hopping. I love star hopping, makes it sound as if you have an interstellar pogo stick

[LukeSkywatcher]

For me personally if i manage to see a Messier object even once, i add it to my list. I really should keep a list.

[SiriusB]

For me personally if i manage to see a Messier object even once, i add it to my list. I really should keep a list.

Get yourself a Messier card Luke & put a dot next to each one as you see it.

I've got some very old dots & some fairly new ones, i even started getting smart & using different colour dots for different scopes.

Of course more organised people than myself would make copious notes in their observing logs! I find the dots a useful quick ref though.

As far as confirming a sighting goes, if there's any doubt i pan away & refind the suspect later in the night.

[Doc]

If I can see it through the scope I claim it. I agree that some are really hard and I might only appear as a averted vision dim smudge but If I see it then I claim it.

[iamjulian]

So what were messier 111 to 120 like

hee hee, I loved the irony.

[Nick P]

Interesting points everyone, so no 'hard and fast' rules!

Personally I find my viewed Messiers fall into two camps, those that I have seen and those that I have studied (sketched logged etc), the latter feel more like a personal achievement (if you know what I mean)

PS The intention of the thread was not about claiming observations not made which I have no doubt no one would do as its pointless

[John]

Thats the great thing about astronomy - no rules, no competition, do it just the way you want, take as much, or as little as you want from the hobby

[Space Beagle]

Interesting thread!

It seems that the majority of people on here don't feel the need to fib about what they have /have not seen as there is no point as you'd only be kidding yourself!

I think i'm only on 21 out of 110 of this list so far but am chuffed with the satisfaction of finding them (and narked if I can't find one of my targets of a night..) It's just a handy thing to have some kind of list to help organise yourself in what you want to see!

Doc

[Talitha]

Personally I find my viewed Messiers fall into two camps, those that I have seen and those that I have studied (sketched logged etc), the latter feel more like a personal achievement (if you know what I mean)

PS The intention of the thread was not about claiming observations not made which I have no doubt no one would do as its pointless

I know exactly what you mean about the sketches being a personal achievement, Nick... it takes concentration and dedication. Aside from that, sketching helps us to become better observers... and to me, that's the ultimate personal achievment.

Just a note.. i think the word "prove" in your original post might have been what brought up the subject of people claiming to have seen things which they didn't. Personally, i thought you were making a reference to observing programs some clubs have, which require participants make sketches to prove that they saw the object. It's a good way to make us slow down and discipline the impatience we have to see everything all at once.

[bombassa]

So what were messier 111 to 120 like

They were rather pink...

Ow you got me! I probably haven't seen more than 20-30 of them.

A Messier card sounds like a nice idea.

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

They were rather pink...

Ow you got me! I probably haven't seen more than 20-30 of them.

A Messier card sounds like a nice idea.

Pink? did they resemble elephants (or otters)?

[Beulah]

I think for me, it's not just "sighting" the Messier object, it's knowing more information about it. That's why I have enjoyed reading Doc's observational reports, as he always give a little backstory to each object her has observed.

[LukeSkywatcher]

I'm thinking about using a digital dictaphone to record my observations. That way, in yrs to come i can listen back to them on the computer and hear how things were on that night. The dictaphone i have can record upto 70 hrs of sound.