Stargazing Live Response (possibly)

[aimzta85]

No street lights here .... phew

Just on annoying neighbor that leaves his outside light on when he has gone to the pub.

My neighbour is like that. I think it's left on for the dog

[AlexB]

Our neighbour got so fed up with one street light that shone through his window (not for gazing purposes) that he taped up the side of the light to reduce the glare coming out at right angles to it - it has made a huge difference - if we could get these lights to have a narrower spread of light it would be a great start

Would be something not unreasonable to produce cowlings for street lights to make them all down-lighters!

Not sure how much benefit it will be though as obviously everything (to varying degrees) will reflect that light so it will still pollute! Has there been any serious study on the matter?

[JamesM]

Stargazers Live was a success in as much as it got people to off their backsides and go and take a look at the bigger picture.

However, it really didn't do much for actual 'stargazing' itself. Interestingly, The BBC sought fit to pre-record Ross's observation section, though they carefully didn't say that it was (Jupiter's moons were in the wrong position by days) so why wasn't there more VT on any other observational topics in case of cloud on the night? No instead they got a bloke to set up his kit, so that those inside could keep going outside to check up on what the 'latest' situation is. The magazine format which is so popular in television, kept flitting backwards and forwards between Hawaii, inside and outside the studio without really explaining anything in detail. There seems to be this idea, that by moving everything about, you can help create a high tempo that means everyone has to keep dashing about because its the only way of fitting it 'all' in. The reality should be to actually slow it all down, taking your time to explain relevant topics well and so help people to learn something for once. It wasn't a program about stargazing at all, it was a miniature cosmos program with lots of little bits about anything related to space but very little on actual stargazing. What the hell has meteorites got to do with stargazing and how long did they spend on that? The only reason why that should have been included was if it was a danger to go observing when there is a meteorite showing on at the same time and you were danger of being injured by falling debris - it certainly didn't make any impact on me! There was no mention about different types of telescopes, how they work and their advantages and disadvantages. Absolutely no information what so ever on what people can expect to see when looking through an eyepiece except for a 10 second moment at the beginning of the first program. In my opinion the program did not do what it said on the tin!

The last point which I find the most irritating of all, is that in order to make everything more exciting, they had to include deep sky images along with widefield images that you obtain with a digital camera sat on a tripod. The impression they gave was that after their brief instructional session (which said nothing about focusing!) that anyone who took the camera outside, could also take images that, in reality, cost a lot of time and money to produce. Its not surprising then that every other person wanting to join this forum also wants advice on imaging. That still fine because the forum is about advising people, but unfortunately when the reality is revealed on what it takes to get those images - there are going to be many that are going to be very disappointed.

James

[rowan46]

James as usual your points are well made and mostly I agree with them. However I beg to differ on a couple of points if you will excuse me. I disagree that the program did nothing for stargazing, the interest shown by so many new people, in this forum and at astro societies up and down the country is no mean feat. Some astronomers from here go and do outreach work they know how hard it is to get new people. I imagine that getting the peoples imagination fired up is an easy thing with astronomy. what is hard is getting people away from their telly's and games in the first place. This program has done this for many hundreds of people and as such has done "stargazing " an excellellent service.

As to your comments on the content I sort of agree with you except for one problem. I don't feel it was aimed at us, its only my opinion but I feel it was aimed at people who had no knowledge of astronomy and wasn't meant to be astronomy 101 but more of a trailer if you like, like those previews you get at the pictures that tell you nothing really about the film but are meant to pique your interest.

Perhaps there could be a follow up programme which is more content orientated designed for people like me who find the sky at night heavy going sometimes. a sort of sky at night light.

As I said I disagree with your opinion on a couple of points but I also respect the merits of much of what you say.

[JamesM]

I would be the first to agree that astronomy is something that perhaps can now be talked about without it being accompanied by the words "nerd" or "anorak". From an outreach perspective, many society members were a bit caught off guard by this programme's sudden appearance with literature, posters and handouts all being produced last minute. From the many conversations that I have had, many felt that yes it was an excellent vehicle for recruiting interest at a local level but it could have been so much more successful had the BBC given those on the 'inside' as it were more notice. I also felt that the programme's schedule was a little too near Christmas and would have been better placed around now. For example my own society has only just recently started its weekly meetings, well after the programme has been aired.

We all have opinions on what we would choose to include and if this was a regular event, then I'm sure it would settle down with plenty of time to cover many aspect of astronomy. I just felt that an opportunity had been missed in which to engage people with knowledge about the basics. Instead, the powers that be feel we have to take the broadcast abroad, to somewhere sunny and as one member commented recently," it seemed like an episode of wish you were here".

At the heart of my argument is that this pepped up magazine style is just simply froth over substance. Many programs that are 'live' such as Spring Watch rely heavily on VT to insure against nature's non appearance (usually badgers!) yet all we had was a guy in a field, made partially more interesting by the sight of a large radio telescope in the background, lest we forget what he is actually supposed to be doing there. I do like your idea of "Astronomy Lite" and it might introduce the topic of how carbon fibre is now helping to shape modern scope production - only joking, but little and often would allow for better production values that are less about celebrity participation and more about what people can actually DO to get involved.

I'm not going to hold my breath!

James

[rowan46]

I think we agree on much more than we disagree, as I said it was only an alternative viewpoint and I just thought it worthwhile to highlight the positive aspects of the show. I guess we have slightly different views on whats important, but only slightly different. As usual your post has given me something to think on so thankyou for that

[Venus_is_my_friend]

I enjoyed it and three things bugged me:-

1. Jonathan Ross, he didn't help promote Astronomy at all with his reaction to seeing Jupiter. Even my wife said he acted like he was diassapointed.

2. The lassy in Hawaii, she has an annoying habit of saying "yeah, yeah" and "uh-hu" as if she is not listening or hurrying the person to shut up. Very irritating.

3. Dr Cox getting cut off by jokes or light hearted humour when he was on the verge of saying something informative.

On the plus side I did love Brian's comment of astrology it was something like "Becuase this is the BBC and we need to be fair I have to say that Astrology is utter rubbish" HAHA!

Also his comment on when Dara said he had been to visit a bloke who makes music out of the sound of stars, it was muttered comment like "that's rubbish because sounds can't travel in a vaccum"

[SlipperySquid]

I never saw any of it...I was outside imaging...Though I did see a bit of it at the neighbours a week later as they had Sky+ it...Found it boring myself Though I've had loads of people (well about 5) quizing me on Astronomy and asking about scopes!

If it get's more people looking up at the heavens it can't be a bad thing now can it!

[D:Ream]

I thought the show was superb. Dara O'Brien was a revelation and I hope Dara and Brian team up in the future. Yes, it is certainly true that the show was less about stargazing and more about space in general. In part, that was due to the cloudy conditions but I actually liked that. My budding interest in astronomy comes from a wider interest in space generally rather than knowing the names of the constellations. And even though the show did not include much 'stargazing', it has inspired me to have a go.

I *loved* Brian talking to the guys on the ISS. In partcular, I loved how much he was loving talking to them, bless!