Perfect polar alignment requires a perfectly level mount. This is very difficult to do with a tripod, especially under field conditions. Just my .02 Barney
Barney's exactly right with his comment about the need to make sure the mount is level. Adding to the difficulty, I happen to know, is that sometimes the factory-mounted bubble level is not level. That was the case with my old Celestron 8". I plan to check my Meade 12" to make sure. The hassle of getting the tripod level is amazing and by the time you manage it, you are likely to have thrown off the north alignment. When you "re-north" the setup, the level is off! That was part of the misery I went through Friday night. --best wishes, Joe
Joe how bout an autoguider?? Get your alignment pretty good and let the silicon do the tracking corrections?? and then enjoy the evening .............. A few small round paver stones or pieces of 3/4" ply w/ a hole for the tripod to sit in will keep the tripod from sinking into soft-ish soils. We're lucky here, it's mostly lava ;^) Aloha Rob
Actually, I will be using an autoguider, but I want to get it set up as well as I can first. I didn't think the autoguider would work right with that (I haven't tried it yet). Thanks, Joe
You know, I have 2 autoguiders, but never use them. It seems to me that at a certain point, the human being is no longer taking the picture. Guiding by eye and hand is where the skill & practice come in, also the enjoyment. If you don't have to do anything that requires skill, heck, just get your pictures from already-published sources and stay at home. When "everybody" can do it, it's no longer special or even interesting. While I'm wearing my Curmudgeon suit, I'd also state that a level tripod is not a prerequisite for accurate polar alignment. The only requirement is that the mount's polar axis be parallel with the earth's polar axis. I doubt that my tripod is ever level when polar aligned. A level tripod (mount head) is only helpful when following the star-drift method, but it is not actually required for true polar alignment. Rob's suggestion of pads under the legs is a good one. I always had a few small pieces of plywood in the car just for this. --- Rob Ratkowski <ratkwski@hawaii.rr.com> wrote:
Joe
how bout an autoguider?? Get your alignment pretty good and let the silicon do the tracking corrections?? and then enjoy the evening .............. A few small round paver stones or pieces of 3/4" ply w/ a hole for the tripod to sit in will keep the tripod from sinking into soft-ish soils. We're lucky here, it's mostly lava ;^)
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover
Hi Chuck #1. Good job on quitting smoking!! I did also about 2 years ago and it is SO MUCH BETTER to have health and smell human and not like a burned weed. #2. Most of the best astrophotos today are all autoguided (but you know that), it's what's happening and yes there is the loss of the human eye/hand coordination in doing the image but then you do "process" on a computer assuming you're using a CCD camera and not film. I do always ask the why question when I want a particular image, it's so much easier to download or purchase but it's the hunt and conquest that drives us to want to be involved, I guess it's the journey .................... #3. Still wet here on Maui #4. Just have FUN Aloha Rob
Re. hand-guiding vs. astroguider: I have done it by hand and it's one of the most laborious, cramping, boring, eye-straining jobs I've ever done. Just driving to a dark site, setting up, getting all the gear to work correctly, finding a guide star, composing the photo, calculating exposure and taking the view itself -- those are enough challenge for me. I will feel thrilled if I ever manage to do it. Thanks, Joe
--- Joe Bauman <bau@desnews.com> wrote:
Re. hand-guiding vs. astroguider: I have done it by hand and it's one of the most laborious, cramping, boring, eye-straining jobs I've ever done.
Oh, pooh, nonsense. It's hardly physically demanding. No more eye straining than any other type of visual observing if you are reasonably well polar aligned. The days of 4-hour exposures are over (for the most part, anyway). Come-on, it's OK to just admit "I don't like to hand-guide". __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover
I don't like to hand-guide -- because it's boring, blinding and cramping!!! And demanding! -- Joe
Maybe a bit like hand flying in instrument conditions. That is stressful and requires a bunch of constant concentration. That's another vanishing activity. VFR flying is fun. IFR flying is work! Brent --- Joe Bauman <bau@desnews.com> wrote:
I don't like to hand-guide -- because it's boring, blinding and cramping!!! And demanding! -- Joe
_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com
http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy
Visit the Photo Gallery: http://www.utahastronomy.com
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover
Joe Bauman wrote:
I don't like to hand-guide -- because it's boring, blinding and cramping!!! And demanding! -- Joe
This thread reminds me of a thought I've had before about when film was first making inroads into astronomical imaging. Do you suppose that back around the mid 19th century there were old astronomers that were aghast at the very idea of recording views of the heavens with film and not with the then traditional pen, ink and paper? Patrick :-)
Yes, Chuck, it seems the way of the future is to let the machine do it all for you. The computer finds the object, guides the photo and "fixes" the exposure when your all through. It almost seems like there is as much work now to find an image on the internet as there is in taking your automatic scope outside and telling it to produce a digital image of your "target". Oh for the days when you did it by hand! But then, I guess there are still those who have not yet succumbed to the automation. What would the Herschel 400 be if all the objects were found without digital aid? It all boils down to the fact that different folks enjoy different methods. Different strokes. I just know that my preference is like the ad of yesteryear said: "Mother, please! I'd rather do it myself!" For those who have the automatic scopes, I respect your choice. It is just not my preference. Brent --- Chuck Hards <chuckhards@yahoo.com> wrote:
You know, I have 2 autoguiders, but never use them. It seems to me that at a certain point, the human being is no longer taking the picture. Guiding by eye and hand is where the skill & practice come in, also the enjoyment. If you don't have to do anything that requires skill, heck, just get your pictures from already-published sources and stay at home. When "everybody" can do it, it's no longer special or even interesting. While I'm wearing my Curmudgeon suit, I'd also state that a level tripod is not a prerequisite for accurate polar alignment. The only requirement is that the mount's polar axis be parallel with the earth's polar axis. I doubt that my tripod is ever level when polar aligned. A level tripod (mount head) is only helpful when following the star-drift method, but it is not actually required for true polar alignment. Rob's suggestion of pads under the legs is a good one. I always had a few small pieces of plywood in the car just for this.
--- Rob Ratkowski <ratkwski@hawaii.rr.com> wrote:
Joe
how bout an autoguider?? Get your alignment pretty good and let the silicon do the tracking corrections?? and then enjoy the evening .............. A few small round paver stones or pieces of 3/4" ply w/ a hole for the tripod to sit in will keep the tripod from sinking into soft-ish soils. We're lucky here, it's mostly lava ;^)
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover
_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com
http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy
Visit the Photo Gallery: http://www.utahastronomy.com
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover
Brent, when you and I started in this hobby, it was for "frustrated scientists". The main goal was to further our own knowledge, and possibly contribute to science. Now it seems that astronomy at the "club" level is a consumer and social activity. Telescope and equipment making have become marginalized and no longer really matter; most ATM's these days build carbon-copies of the Same Old Thing. Even learning the basics is eschewed by most folks. Has our time passed? Is the advice "learn to walk before you run" no longer valid? Is it time to ride off into the sunset and let the Social Consumers do their thing? Let's put it to a vote. Everyone on the list is welcome, one vote each. Should Chuck quit the hobby? Vote yes or no. If the "YES" votes win, I'm gone. POOF! If the "NO" votes win, you gotta listen to Grandpa for a while longer. --- Brent Watson <brentjwatson@yahoo.com> wrote:
Yes, Chuck, it seems the way of the future is to let the machine do it all for you. The computer finds the object, guides the photo and "fixes" the exposure when your all through. It almost seems like there is as much work now to find an image on the internet as there is in taking your automatic scope outside and telling it to produce a digital image of your "target".
Oh for the days when you did it by hand! But then, I guess there are still those who have not yet succumbed to the automation. What would the Herschel 400 be if all the objects were found without digital aid?
Gosh, why then it would actually test the observers skill! How unfair to those who don't want to have to make a real effort! __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover
Of course the answer is no. Just because you and I have different preferences does not mean we should forget the hobby because of innovation. New stuff makes thing s easier, for the most part. (Enable is another word that comes to mind.) With each step of making things easier, there are new plateaus that can be reached. The thing most people don't think about is that there is usually something lost at the same time. I prefer to not loose what I have. 95% of the time I can beat the machines anyway. But then, that is only important to me. Others have (and should be allowed) other preferences. I would, however, enjoy seeing the manual abilities preserved and mastered, just as you and I have and continue to do. Now, if the vote is "yes", I suggest that is a vote to get rid of us both. Otherwise, an occasional rant should be expected. Old habits should not die! Brent --- Chuck Hards <chuckhards@yahoo.com> wrote:
Brent, when you and I started in this hobby, it was for "frustrated scientists". The main goal was to further our own knowledge, and possibly contribute to science. Now it seems that astronomy at the "club" level is a consumer and social activity. Telescope and equipment making have become marginalized and no longer really matter; most ATM's these days build carbon-copies of the Same Old Thing. Even learning the basics is eschewed by most folks.
Has our time passed? Is the advice "learn to walk before you run" no longer valid?
Is it time to ride off into the sunset and let the Social Consumers do their thing?
Let's put it to a vote. Everyone on the list is welcome, one vote each.
Should Chuck quit the hobby? Vote yes or no.
If the "YES" votes win, I'm gone. POOF! If the "NO" votes win, you gotta listen to Grandpa for a while longer.
--- Brent Watson <brentjwatson@yahoo.com> wrote:
Yes, Chuck, it seems the way of the future is to let the machine do it all for you. The computer finds the object, guides the photo and "fixes" the exposure when your all through. It almost seems like there is as much work now to find an image on the internet as there is in taking your automatic scope outside and telling it to produce a digital image of your "target".
Oh for the days when you did it by hand! But then, I guess there are still those who have not yet succumbed to the automation. What would the Herschel 400 be if all the objects were found without digital aid?
Gosh, why then it would actually test the observers skill! How unfair to those who don't want to have to make a real effort!
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover
_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com
http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy
Visit the Photo Gallery: http://www.utahastronomy.com
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover
De-lurking for a moment... I don't have an auto-guider, or even anything to use for manual guiding. But if I did go for some kind of guiding, it would be of the auto variety because I like to look at the stars while the camera is gathering the light. I especially like looking for shooters, and you miss every one of them if you're watching a guide star in the cross-hairs. :) Rich Allen
Sorry, folks, lets just drop this vote thing. I have a lot on my mind these years, and just about everything is stressful. Everything. Everything. Think I'll just lurk for a while. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover
A few thoughts swirling in my head... If autoguiding means you set up the scope and then go in the house and watch "Fear Factor" or some such nonsense for the hour you are taking the photo, I could see your point Chuck. But if it allows you to image AND observe (with your other scope) at the same time, hey, twice the astronomy, more bang for your buck! If you like to make furniture the old fashioned way strictly with hand tools, no table saws or routers for you thank you very much, and feel the satisfaction of having something truly hand made, wonderful; but would you sneer at the guy making his chair with a lathe and a bandsaw, if what he's really after is a beautiful end product, that he also considers "hand made"? Not necessarily. Is a clay pot made on a potter's wheel any less "valid" artistically if, instead of kicking the wheel with his foot to make it turn, he's got a motor and a pulley making it go? That's kinda how I see this debate. If you are building a house and have the choice of swinging a 32 oz hammer all day, or using a pneumatic nail gun for an hour, the choice likely depends on if your tool budget included the air compressor or not. What you are after is the finished home, no? No sense tying one hand behind your back so to speak, though owning the table saw doesn't mean you can't leave the thing unplugged while you carefully cut with a hand saw, if, at the end of the day, that kind of activity gives you greater satisfaction. If I plow my field with a tractor, or pull the old-fashioned kind behind my horse, will the vegetables taste any different come harvest time? Am I off base in my thinking here? Am I missing something? -Rich --- Chuck Hards <chuckhards@yahoo.com> wrote:
Brent, when you and I started in this hobby, it was for "frustrated scientists". The main goal was to further our own knowledge, and possibly contribute to science. Now it seems that astronomy at the "club" level is a consumer and social activity. Telescope and equipment making have become marginalized and no longer really matter; most ATM's these days build carbon-copies of the Same Old Thing. Even learning the basics is eschewed by most folks.
Has our time passed? Is the advice "learn to walk before you run" no longer valid?
Is it time to ride off into the sunset and let the Social Consumers do their thing?
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover
--- Richard Tenney <retenney@yahoo.com> wrote:
But if it allows you to image AND observe (with your other scope) at the same time, hey, twice the astronomy, more bang for your buck!
Am I off base in my thinking here? Am I missing something?
Hi Rich: Yes. You are missing the imaging experience. That equipment you set up earlier is doing it without you. I'd be embarrassed to take credit for an autoguided photo, I can see I have some ethical decisions to make if I ever do fire up my autoguiders. "Sequence initiated by Jack Cards" or maybe "Imaging product X set up and turned on by Jack Cards". Maybe I could live with that. But perhaps I'm being far too old fashioned and self-righteous in my thinking. Ive never thought in terms of "multi-tasking" leisure activities before! ;) __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover
participants (8)
-
Barney B. -
Brent Watson -
Chuck Hards -
Joe Bauman -
Patrick Wiggins -
Rich Allen -
Richard Tenney -
Rob Ratkowski