[madbadgalaxyman (Robert)]

Very interesting post, RobK, showing some divergence of opinion between two people, both of whom have done a lot of visual observing.
This divergence does illustrate the fact that there may be important discrepancies between experienced observers, as regards the optimal techniques for seeing diffuse and low surface brightness features and objects.

Other types of observational science have adopted standardized techniques, and I believe that the field of visual deep sky observation would benefit from the same type of standardization......let's get all of our worthwile visual observing techniques together into one list, and then make up a really detailed "how to" for visual deep sky observers.
(e.g. averted vision techniques have been discussed at length, in some forums, yet this process is still poorly understood by many observers)
________________________________

You are right that a single longer detection of the faint object or feature helps to cement the case for it being something that exists in the real universe.
I have had more success than you have with coming back to the same object later in the night, in order to see if I can detect anything more than I did at first (or maybe detecting less than I did at first) .

My point about using binos and an air mattress to relax the mind and body , in between sessions at the telescope, is an obvious point, yet this technique is not always adopted by visual deep sky observers, despite the fact that it noticeably increases the observer's ability to detect faint features when she/he goes back to the telescope after the observer has spent a few minutes on his back using the binos.
___________________________________

When I was in my prime for visual observation, I found that two family-sized chocolate bars plus a packet or two of Tim Tams, per every night of observation, did wonders for my energy levels (ha ha)
(it's a wonder that all that chocolate didn't poison me)

___________________________________ ___