Thread: Scope's-R-us
View Single Post
Old 18-08-2008, 05:25 PM
jase (Jason)
Registered User

jase is offline
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Melbourne, Victoria
Posts: 3,916
Originally Posted by Peter Ward View Post
Jase, nah, I don't see the distinction.
Ah, the journey up hill is getting hard.

Originally Posted by Peter Ward View Post
It all comes down to budget.
Hallelujah, have we seen the photons people? Precisely, it comes down to ones budget and how keen they are to acquire quality data. As I mentioned in my previous post, to obtain quality data you need to outlay some moolah to buy equipment outright or alternatively buy time on some premium instruments. Which comes back to your original post…buy time online or use your own gear. The choice is solely the decision of the individual – no one else. By all means put your head in the sand, just make sure you pluck it out so you don’t get left behind. Trends are emerging; you only need to look around at some of the contenders;

Not to mention, many, many private operators with top end gear at hosting facilities I previously mentioned (Riverland Dingo, Pingelly and NMSkies) that would be eager to take your money for a few hours. Just as a painter chooses his/her scene they wish to paint, now the imager to determine the target and ideal optical system to acquire it. No one said such services were cheap, but neither is buying your gear outright.
This whole topic I still find very humorous. The quality data you acquire (not “freely available” download) doesn’t magically transform into a masterpiece in front of your eyes. You still need to work for it. Hence, imaging processing is THE critical component regardless if your acquiring the data on a humble rig that’s automated or a remote telescope over the other side of the world.

Originally Posted by strongmanmike View Post
Peter Wards HST Helix composition perfectly illustrates where astroimaging contests could go if we are not careful. I know we don't see eye to eye on everything Peter ...but you have illusrtrated the point perfectly.

Jase you just don't get it... what you did with the 24" is only marginally different to what Peter has done mate, sorry (of course Peter Hubbles version was MUCH better ). In fact, the fact that you had some "control" of "your" Hubble makes it even more unfair if anything!

Acording to your argument Jase, in essence Peter should be happily allowed to enter that image in the next SPSP astroimaging contest or the 2009 David Malin awards or any other imaging contest that doesn't specifically preclude such an effort.

As far as I am concerned, the minor differences you highlight are just that, and are of little consequence as far as what the essence of an amateur imaging contest should be.
Well illustrated? You guys are gagging me. Clearly, flawed if you ask me. Read the competition rules Mike – No professional observatory images…uh, that would include the hubble wouldn’t it dah! 24”RC owned by an amateur considered professional? Huh? How about I mortgage a few properties and host one in Pingelly or my own dark sky site, can I still enter the amateur comp or am I too "professional" for you guys?

Mike, you’ve used the term professional quite a lot in previous posts – What’s your definition?

So, Peter/Mike, How about defining those competition rules to end this debate for all time. You’ve both got the strings into the CWAS board to make things happen (via John).

Regardless, nothing is going to stop me doing remote it with purchased time or when I complete my own remote set up. As to whether I'll enter them into a comp needs to be determined. Its time to draw the line and think about the categories and definitions...before its too late.
Reply With Quote