#1  
Old 15-06-2016, 08:48 AM
Andy01's Avatar
Andy01 (Andy)
My God it's full of stars

Andy01 is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 2,292
The "Art" of Astrophotography - Article

https://www.theguardian.com/artandde...-made-in-space

Interesting reading...

"So, one reason science has become so good at making art since 1995 is that art has shaped the way scientists see. Astronomers look at a nebula and see a grandiose painting."

So are we producing scientific images, technical art or cosmic landscapes?
Maybe all three?
I am unashamedly placing one foot firmly in the technical art camp, but others may have their own thoughts...

What do you think?
Cheers
Andy
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 15-06-2016, 09:39 AM
bojan's Avatar
bojan
amateur

bojan is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Mt Waverley, VIC
Posts: 5,953
Techical photography it is, IMHO
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 15-06-2016, 11:45 AM
billdan's Avatar
billdan (Bill)
Registered User

billdan is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Narangba, SE QLD
Posts: 1,338
Thanks for providing that link Andy it was really nice to read.

It does put things into perspective, that we as amateurs who tinker and curse our equipment to tweak the best performance we can to make our images. We then keep our fingers crossed that we have enough data to make not just a decent image but a work of art.
Regularly now, some of us produce real works of art that wows not only other astronomers but the general public as well.

As for your question, I think NB imaging is technical art and OSC imaging is cosmic landscapes.

Question, do you know what that last photograph in the article is? The one described as a delicate butterfly. Is it something we amateurs can collect data on?


Cheers
Bill
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 15-06-2016, 01:44 PM
alocky's Avatar
alocky (Andrew lockwood)
PI popular people's front

alocky is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: perth australia
Posts: 1,287
Quote:
Originally Posted by billdan View Post
Question, do you know what that last photograph in the article is? The one described as a delicate butterfly. Is it something we amateurs can collect data on?


Cheers
Bill
Hi Bill it's NGC 6302 in Scorpio often called the bug. Check out the deep space astrophotography forum for a couple of recent excellent images.
Cheers,
Andrew.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 15-06-2016, 02:35 PM
billdan's Avatar
billdan (Bill)
Registered User

billdan is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Narangba, SE QLD
Posts: 1,338
Thanks Andrew, I went back and had a look at the bug images and I see the resemblance now.
Bill
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 15-06-2016, 04:54 PM
rally
Registered User

rally is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 896
Try to define it by its volume of popularity and it will metamorphasise into something new that blurrs the traditional definition.

That is what makes pictures of an old target presented in a new way exciting and pleasurable.

If we change what the eye can see for the purpose of recording or deriving useful information I guess we can call it Science, if we change it to please the eye its Art. If both occurs at the same time then it must be Artistic Science !!!
No reason science cant be pleasing to the eye.

My take.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +10. The time is now 04:20 AM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7 | Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement
Lunatico Astronomical
Advertisement
NexDome Observatories
Advertisement
Celestron Australia
Advertisement
Meade Australia
Advertisement
OzScopes Authorised Dealer
Advertisement
SkyWatcher Australia
Advertisement
Bintel
Advertisement
Astronomy and Electronics Centre
Advertisement