- Utah-Astronomy - mailman.xmission.com

Slides posted in the gallery
by UTAHDEB＠aol.com 02 Aug '04

02 Aug '04

I finally got some slides posted in the gallery. My computer hasn't died yet. They look better when viewed with a slide projector. Most exposures are 8-12 minutes on at f/4 on 135mm f/2.8 lens. One thing I learned is I need to improve my notetaking. I had to figure out what I was looking at when I got the slides back. Will shoot more in about a couple of weeks. Debbie

3 2

I'm baack...!
by Kim Hyatt 02 Aug '04

02 Aug '04

Yes folks, Kim is back. I'm employed (sort of) or rather self-employed. (If those who can do, and those who can't teach, how do you describe the self-employed?) Anyway, hope to hear from y'all. Kim Hyatt Architect 1849 East 1300 South Salt Lake City, Utah 84108 801.631.5228 kimharch(a)msn.com<mailto:kimharch@msn.com> serius est quam cogitas

5 11

Re: [Utah-astronomy] Hello...?
by UTAHDEB＠aol.com 02 Aug '04

02 Aug '04

In a message dated 7/24/2004 12:50:02 PM Eastern Daylight Time, David L Bennett <dlbennett(a)mac.com> writes: >Hi Jo, > >How was your trip? Â SLAStrofest went very considering the nasty weather >we had the entire weekend. Â We had a great turnout despite the clouds >though. Â We probably had as many as 50 people at one point during the >day on Saturday. Â All the lectures were well received (even mine) and >people seemed to have a good time while learning some of the ins and >outs of amateur astronomy. Â The Star-B-Que was also a great >success...no one went hungry! Â Another plus were the porta-johns >brought up thanks to Alpine & Roger...well received too ;) > >Dave > >On Friday, July 23, 2004, at 08:20 Â PM, Josephine Grahn wrote: > >> Hi, >> We went on a trip, and it appears that the list has died. :) Â Is >> everyone >> really being so quiet? Â Did anyone post anything about slastrofest? Â I >> am >> curious as to how that worked out. >> Thanks, >> Jo >> I just got back from Calif and found out the battery on the computer is dead. I will post some pictures of the slides I took a week ago Sunday as soon as the battery arrives. I had to deal with lightning, airplanes, laser pointers, bats and mosquitos up at Kolob reservoir. But at 9000 ft and 7.0 mag skies, I can't really complain. This astrophotography stuff is harder than I thought it was. Hopefully I got a few decent pictures. I can't wait for the meteor shower! Clear Skies, Debbie >> __________________________________________ > > >_______________________________________________ >Utah-Astronomy mailing list >Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com >http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy >Visit the Photo Gallery: http://www.utahastronomy.com >

3 2

Re: [Utah-astronomy] Re: Slides posted in the gallery
by UTAHDEB＠aol.com 31 Jul '04

31 Jul '04

I did a slideshow on the laptop. The slides looked real good except for the red nebulae in the Lagoon and Trifid nebulae. The red did show up a bit when I zoomed in at 100%. I guess I'm going to have to switch to digital sooner or later. But I think slides are fun for piggy-back work. What you see is what you get and nobody at the lab can mess them up. The authors of the "Backyard Astronomer's Guide" say that piggy-back astrophotography is film's last domain as far as astrophotography goes. Debbie

1 0

Re: [Utah-astronomy] Re: Slides posted in the gallery
by UTAHDEB＠aol.com 31 Jul '04

31 Jul '04

In a message dated 7/30/2004 11:15:04 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Chuck Hards <chuckhards(a)yahoo.com> writes: > >--- UTAHDEB(a)aol.com wrote: > >> I wish the >> resolution was the same >> as the original slides. > >That's the same problem I had, scanning 3x5's & 4x6's. > And none of the monitors I've used have been able to >display the full brightness range of the original >either. Â Next time I'll try as big a print as the >scanner bed can acommodate. > >Chuck, What kind of scanner would you recommend? I was thinking of a 1200 dpi or higher scanner. The camera store charged my $8 to have those slides scanned and I think I could do a better job myself. That Fuji Sensia 400 is good slide film but I think the Ektachrome 200 or P1600 is better. It's more sensitive to the red nebulosity. Debbie > Â Â Â Â >__________________________________ >Do you Yahoo!? >Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out! >http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail > >_______________________________________________ >Utah-Astronomy mailing list >Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com >http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy >Visit the Photo Gallery: http://www.utahastronomy.com >

3 2

Re: [Utah-astronomy] Re: Slides posted in the gallery
by UTAHDEB＠aol.com 31 Jul '04

31 Jul '04

I found out that the slides were scanned with a 3000 by 2000 dpi scanner. I'd like to go with digital but for piggy-back I want to stick with film. I think I can take 15-20 minute exposures at my dark site without fogging. Which Jim are you referring to? I seem to know a lot of Jims. Debbie

1 0

Re: [Utah-astronomy] Re: Three more slides posted in the gallery
by UTAHDEB＠aol.com 31 Jul '04

31 Jul '04

I've posted a few more slides of the Cygnus and Sagittarius regions. Debbie

1 0

Odd but amusing
by Patrick Wiggins 31 Jul '04

31 Jul '04

Submitted for your consideration... http://www.quisp.com/cartoon/index.html Patrick :-)

2 1

Re: [Utah-astronomy] Re: Slides posted in the gallery
by UTAHDEB＠aol.com 30 Jul '04

30 Jul '04

I added one more photo of the Sagittarius area above the Teapot. I still have a few more pictures to resize then post. I wish the resolution was the same as the original slides. I was disappointed that some of the red nebulosity didn't show up on the scanned computer images like it did on the slides. I guess planes are a fact of life as are mosquitos. I'll remember the deet next time too! Debbie

2 1

Re: [Utah-astronomy] Slides posted in the gallery
by UTAHDEB＠aol.com 30 Jul '04

30 Jul '04

The only problem with this site is I am in the glide path of airplanes going to Las Vegas. How far east to I have to go to get out of the glide path? Debbie

2 1