Thread: Scope's-R-us
View Single Post
  #23  
Old 18-08-2008, 10:15 AM
jase (Jason)
Registered User

jase is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Melbourne, Victoria
Posts: 3,916
As my recent post was the catalyst for this thread created by Peter, it would be wrong for me to not make comment. Besides, I enjoy a constructive and healthy debate.

I do find it interesting the remarks made by Peter – “The only thing I am jealous of is not being able to be at home often enough to use the gear I do have.” Quoted from this thread.

While Peter has the issue of not being at home to use his 14.5”RC on a PME, he also faces problems with disappointing skies, both weather and light pollution related. This raises quite a significant question on the return on investment. It’s lovely to purchase all this “professional research grade gear” (as StrongmanMike puts it), but when you can’t use it or its full potential is limited, one must question the value. I would like to refer to another post made by Brad Moore, co-owner of GRAS. He’s graces us with his presence now and then on this very forum. Brad has undoubtedly crunched some numbers to work on the return on investment. I would highly suggest people read this post - it puts a lot of things into perspective when you enter the serious realm of imaging with high end gear. Personally, I can handle my FSQ not seeing light over a couple of months, but if I was to sink serious money into a higher end rig such as 16” RC, I’d want to ensure it was working for me and maximising its output. I certainly wouldn’t be hosting it in my suburban backyard, but arrange a deal with a pier hosting provider such as Pingelly Heights Observatories or Riverland Dingo Observatories. Its like people who live in mansions, they can obviously afford to have a cleaner come in to do duties. If you’ve got the money to purchase a 16” RC, then you’ve got the money to have it hosted and access it remotely - simple.

Everyone is in this hobby for a reason, be it visual work, love of equipment, comradery at star parties, research, imaging etc. I’ve experienced many of these facets and more, but I’ve found that my passion resides with imaging. While I thoroughly enjoy all facets of imaging, my specific focus is on processing. As I progressively gained experience, I’ve realised that to produce quality images, generally speaking, you’ll spend more time processing the data than you did acquiring it. Make no mistakes, processing is king. Regardless of the optical design and quality, you still need to process the data. Of course, you can’t make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear, but in almost all cases you can improve the data you’ve acquired through processing.

With this in mind, I seek ways of acquiring data to process in the most efficient and effective manner. Many take great pleasure to head to a dark sky site, polar align their mount, cool their camera, select a guide star and start imaging. I’m fine with their approach and in most cases it’s the only option for them. I’ve been there and done that, lugging a C11 and Titan to dark sky site for imaging sessions. However, this clearly does not delivery the efficiencies of maximising data acquisition. This in turn led me to purchasing a block of land at a dark sky site to establish a permanent set up I have today. The quest to improve the efficiencies did not stop there; I continue to look to automate the operations and am getting very close. I still need to open up the observatory, but that’s it - I simply upload an imaging plan and walk away. I don’t worry about where the telescope is pointing, if the target is in the frame or whether the camera is focused. Software controls hardware to make it all happen. Now, I can hear many say…where’s the fun in all that…well the truth is there isn’t any. For me, it’s not about the equipment; it’s the processing of data where I experience the most pleasure. My automated set up is actually no different from acquiring data on someone else’s equipment – it’s simply a natural extension to the efficiency process with the added bonus of gaining access to other quality instruments.

I appreciate the qudos for my processing skills that people here recognise. The journey continues...

Quote:
Originally Posted by strongmanmike View Post
Plus...and I'm not sure if I have said this before? ...it's cheating IMO if you then enter this proffessionally acquired image in an imaging contest anyway

Mike
I simply can’t resist not latching on to this statement. Hmmmm. Ok. Now that I’ve told you how I go about acquiring data on my own equipment – upload an imaging plan and walk away, is this deemed as cheating? Is my set up now classified as “professional” as it is so automated and not in the “true spirit” of an amateur? Give me a break! Oh wait, its only if you pay for the data….hmmm ok. Let’s put it in another context, the Lightbuckets 24” RC is in Steve’s (CEO of Lightbuckets) “backyard” in Rodeo, New Mexico. He lives onsite at the ranch. He purchased the equipment for his own personal use, but also decided to allow other amateurs to use the equipment for their specific purposes be it imaging or research. So, if Steve was to process the images he took with this own “professional research grade” gear, would he still considered an amateur? Surely…but wait, what if Steve was to provide me with some “free” scope time…this would still make it “amateur” by your definition as I’m not paying. Food for thought.
Reply With Quote