The Joys of Visual Observing

[Glenn Dawes]

Hi guys,

I've been an observer for most of my life, starting with naked eye, binoculars and then scopes from 60mm refractor to various sized reflectors up to my current 16" lightbridge (fantastic!). I recently showed a friend through the lightbridge some really spectacular deep sky objects and he was amazed I'd spend so much money without being able to photograph.

I've always had answers to such questions, having written on this subject a number of times over years, but I'm curious how some of the IIS members would answer. Your thoughts?

Regards

Glenn

[glend (Glen)]

Well the Lightbridge 16" is no where near as expensive as some of the dedicated astrophotography systems out there, and does not require an investment in computing power and a knowledge of image processing. Your free from the burdens of acquisition of the image to just enjoy the visual experience.

Those are photons that left that DSO thousands or millions of LYs ago that are hitting your eye - not popping into some CCD camera in a long exposure and going via electronics to your monitor, or needing stacking and processing to be able to appreicate. It's a real time experience with real light.

To me it is the being there. at that moment, and having that visual connection to the past light with a bear minimum of technology intruding on the experience. It is astronomy in its purest form.

[Redshift13 (Rohan)]

Originally Posted by glend

To me it is the being there. at that moment, and having that visual connection to the past light with a bear minimum of technology intruding on the experience. It is astronomy in its purest form.

+1
Well said.

[Satchmo]

Nice You left out that to be an astrophotographer you need to be a borderline sociopath.

Only kidding

Originally Posted by glend

Well the Lightbridge 16" is no where near as expensive as some of the dedicated astrophotography systems out there, and does not require an investment in computing power and a knowledge of image processing. Your free from the burdens of acquisition of the image to just enjoy the visual experience.

Those are photons that left that DSO thousands or millions of LYs ago that are hitting your eye - not popping into some CCD camera in a long exposure and going via electronics to your monitor, or needing stacking and processing to be able to appreicate. It's a real time experience with real light.

To me it is the being there. at that moment, and having that visual connection to the past light with a bear minimum of technology intruding on the experience. It is astronomy in its purest form.

[barx1963 (Malcolm)]

It is interesting, I mentioned to a work colleague the other day about imaging, and that one day I may give it a go and he said that he could not understand how someone could consider looking at an image better than seeing an object through the eyepiece.
I guess we all have different ideas about what intrigues us, at the moment I am a visual guy, in the future that may change.

Malcolm

[Allan_L (Allan)]

Originally Posted by Satchmo

Nice You left out that to be an astrophotographer you need to be a borderline sociopath.

ROTFLMAO

Oh Mark!
You have such a way with words~

[jamespierce (James)]

“Considered as a collector of rare and precious things, the amateur astronomer has a great advantage over amateurs in other fields … the amateur astronomer has access at all times to the original objects of his study; the masterworks of the heavens belong to him as much as to the great observatories of the world. And there is no privilege like that of being allowed to stand in the presence of the original.” - Robert Burnham Jr, Burnham’s Celestial Handbook

[N1 (Mirko)]

There is no substitute for the Real Thing. Plain and simple.

IMHO the trouble with photos is that once you have taken so-many, the time it takes to view, enjoy, tweak, share or archive them starts intruding on the time available to see the Real Thing. That's when it gets ridiculous, at least for me, and the PC gets turned off & scope comes out.

[acropolite (Phil)]

I enjoy both visual and imaging, but as a landscape photographer and friend once pointed out, why would you want to take an image of an object that looks identical to everyone elses image of that object.

It's a hard argument to counter, I guess the enjoyment comes in getting the best interpretation of the data you collect and the associated skills needed to achieve the final result.

[ZeroID (Brent)]

To me it as much as the challenge of getting the image, the tehnicalities and problems solved as finally printing or viewing the result. I always enjoy visual, I use bins or another scope mounted above to see what's out there, watch for meteors or satellites etc etc.
Hence I'm not a big fan of remote control although I can see the need in many cases for others. I enjoy my time out there, sociopath or not.

[Shark Bait (Stu)]

I was once asked something similar:

Don't you run out of things to see?
What is the point of looking at the same things each year?

Getting out with a scope or binoculars helps me feel connected with the Cosmos and ponder the unknown. The night sky does change and there is always something new to observe when you get the chance to travel to darker skies. It is a privilege to observe special astronomical events, especially those which occur once in a lifetime.

[glenc (Glen)]

Imaging is too slow for me. I like to see dozens of objects in one night.

[skysurfer]

Originally Posted by glenc

Imaging is too slow for me. I like to see dozens of objects in one night.

Depends on what imaging. For hours exposing a single object with a CCD and a ton of equipment, yes. But with an FF SLR and simple DSS stacking and relatively short exposures (thanks to FF) it is nice. The only extra requirement is my little Android tablet and a timelapse controller.

[guggle (Michael)]

Originally Posted by Shark Bait

Getting out with a scope or binoculars helps me feel connected with the Cosmos and ponder the unknown.

Ditto to that!

I also let my imagination run rampant - thinking about what sort of life is happening out there, whether there's bounty hunters, clones, people searching for their HomeWorld, etc

[FlashDrive (Poppy)]

I've always been Visual ....love it every time I'm at the eyepiece....especially wide field views.
Bino viewing is just ' stunning ' on a lot of ' targets '

Never really been interested in doing Astro-Photography...although... those who post their pic's here ..I appreciate their efforts and most of their pic's are just awesome.

Col.....

[Gem (Grant)]

I am more of a visual observer and have only come into imaging recently. I would much rather look at something through an EP than have a wonderful image on a screen. However, the problem I get these days if few people want to join me on long nights in the cold to do visual when the results are not as good as the photos I show them...

To me, the joy will always be in the serenity of gazing up at the sky through a scope.

[pw (Peter)]

Hello Glenn Dawes (famous author of the annual Astronomy Australia I assume), love your book. :-)

I too like looking at things, binoculars, 8" dob, and now a Lunt solar scope.
Imaging is an adjunct to viewing for me.
It's like, "Hey I saw this really cool thing, here's a picture so you can see it too".
So far I can only image through the solar scope, but one day I may have a night time scope I can make pictures with.

[astrospotter (Mark)]

I do both and often on the same night. My perspective follows.

If I were to make a very general statement I would say that Astrophotography is not at all as relaxing and stress free as visual. Astrophogography frequently presents any number of different issues that will need to be sorted out prior to any decent pictures being captures. The more experience you have, the less frequent the problems but they still happen. You have to be up for a challenge that can happen on any given night that you thought you were going to get a lot done.

Some years back I was deeply into tracking down lists visually and that was sort of stressful in that they would disappear into the sunset and you have to wait 6 month or more for another try. So that can happen with visual OR you cannot find something OR it is too dim and you wanted badly to see it but in general the challenges with Astrophotography are an order of magnitude more frustrating from my experience.

I have met many friends and now have friends I meet as part of a visual group and have a great time going very deep and I meet with my imaging friends and image. I often take a 12" lightbridge out with me for use while imaging. So another aspect is it opens up even more friendships.

I would say to those who say 'why take a picture if it will not be as good as the hundreds already out there' this: 'Because it is my picture'. It often connects me to things I have enjoyed greatly visually in a nice way. If you go to some famous place like Paris would you not take a picture of the tower? (just an example) It is special because it is your own picture and connects you to that 'place' in some way.

Now on the other side of things, I would suggest you do NOT get into astrophotography unless you are up for hundreds of episodes of troubleshooting computers and connections and mechanical issues of all sorts. Do not get into astrophotography if you dont want to spend vast numbers of hours learning technical details of rigs and countless hours learning processing techniques. If you enjoy tinkering and solving problems and EXPECT that to happen then and only then should one try to image. If you feel it will all go well and you will never have nights that you spent over half your time solving problems then you are in for quite a lot of disappointing nights. SO bring your scope and know when to 'fold' and switch to visual to relax.

[Paddy (Patrick)]

Mostly what I feel about this has already been said. As Mark says, trying to manage all that equipment and a computer (in the dark!) seems a recipe for angst to me. But above all I feel that observing visually involves an intimacy with the object that's quite different to imaging. For me, star hopping to the image enhances that feeling of intimacy.

That said, I am preparing to put a camera on my Ha Solar observing outfit. But at least it's in the daylight, it will be quick and I can get back to observing quickly and not worry about ruined night vision.

Not sure why you included "borderline" Mark.

A question that arose at Snake Valley last weekend - do imagers smoke and swear more than visual observers?

[Rob_K]

Originally Posted by Paddy

A question that arose at Snake Valley last weekend - do imagers smoke and swear more than visual observers?

Tut tut, and this from somebody who was caught dabbling in the black art at Snake Valley!

I kind of do both but nothing beats an eyepiece view. It is experiential and connective. The passive appreciation of celestial objects in photographs can't even begin to be compared with it. IMO, if all you are doing with astrophotography is photographing celestial objects, then you are just doing photography. If you use astrophotography as a tool to actively learn more about the Universe then you are doing astronomy.

For me, the camera can show me many things that I can't see through the eyepiece. I don't mean picking up things like the delicate swirls of faint nebulae etc, I mean things I CAN'T see! Dim comets for instance, well beyond my visual limits. And photography allows me do things that interest me like nova & comet searches.

While I know enough to appreciate the effort put into capturing a good image, most amateur astrophotography seems to be about the process, not the object. That is, obtaining the appropriate equipment (second mortgage?), getting it to work, the mysteries of guiding, the endless processing iterations. Oh and at the end there may or may not be a picture. And some amazing ones too, if that's your thing.

Give me a moonless night, inky black skies and a lonely mountain top anytime. Plonk any sort of scope down (or no scope at all!) and commune with the Universe...

Cheers -