The philosopy of astro imaging

[cwjohn]

I am a first time poster who is a long time astroimager that has been out of the hobby for a few years for personal / business reasons and looking to get back involved.

Like many who get involved with this crazy activity the first time around I became smitten to the degree that large sums of money were involved and before I knew it I had a large observatory, a range of high end scopes, several mounts and various sbig cameras and other sorted paraphanalia.

Since then I have moved on changing states and living accommodation. I still have a lot of gear in storage but times have moved on technically and I live in an apartment so in many ways I am looking at a blank slate as to what my next moves are.

However, being somewhat older and wiser, before putting another down payment on on Peter Ward’s next Ferrari, I considered it appropriate to examine exactly why I undertook this hobby in the first place and what exactly I enjoy about it. In undertaking this sort of navel gazing perhaps I can tailor my expenditure for maximal happiness as it were. Naturally I would welcome the feedback of others in this forum.

If I consider this logically I need to start at certain basic conclusions.

I guess I would start with the image itself or in other words the output of the endeavour. I have the wherewithal to download raw Hubble data and process it.to produce world class images, this costing absolutely nothing but time. When I ask myself if this activity would be in any way satisfying then the answer is unequivocally no. Similarly, and much more expensively I can utilise any number of internet sites to use first class, large aperture scopes and top of the range equipment to acquire data. Again, I ask myself would this be in any way satisfying and the answer is again unequivocally no.

Ergo I conclude satisfaction is NOT about the end product (to wit the image) per se.

Secondly, I ask myself if the astronomical part of the equation is a key ingredient, but in examination of this aspect I have to ask myself whether the use of time, resource and funds in astroimaging is better used in this endeavour than spending on astronomical education, an area that I am quite familiar with. Without doubt however, I would learn significantly more about astronomy if my time were devoted to learning, books, reading papers on astro-ph etc.

Ergo I conclude the satisfaction is NOT about learning about astronomy.

Thirdly, I ask myself if the activity is based on comraderie. Well, some of my most enjoyable times in astronomical activities have been crowding around a big dob with a bunch of fellow astronomers preferably with a beer or glass of wine or three. In fact (and I have not discounted this approach) if this were the main aim I would purchase a 25-30” dob which is easily transportable and travel around the various dark sites together with a case of my favourite wine Nothing attracts attention like a big dob and the views and the company improve into the night in direct relation to the amount of alcohol consumed. However, when I ask myself whether this is the approach I wish to take the answer in not a definitive but a general no.

Ergo I conclude that the satisfaction does not lie significantly with the comraderie.

Well, its simple, I hear you saying, its all really to do with the related disciplines of optics, electronics, computers and software all rolled up into the significant challenge of combining these factors to produce an optimal end result, and there is no doubt there is some truth in this view. However, if this were the simple truth then the amount of money expended would be irrelevant. Would it not be equally challenging to see what image you could obtain from a medium quality optic on a synta mount with a DSLR as compared to a RCOptic RC, Paramount ME and a high end Sbig camera. What behoves us to want to spend ever increasing amounts of funds in search of even greater quality of images NONE of which will come within a bulls roar of the quality of a Hubble image. In saying this I should be clear here. Of course many if not most imagers are constrained by funds, and thus the choice is not there for them, but this will not stop them saying “I wish I had an AP mount, and SBIG camera, 2” Astronomic filters etc etc.

Further, as you move up the technology and cost tree invariably the challenge decreases. For instance it is a hell of a lot easier to image with an AP refractor on an AP mount than a Synta refractor on a Synta mount so ergo the lower cost solution is the more challenging ergo surely the lower cost solution will give the most satisfaction. Unfortunately, this does not accord with my personal experience.

A similar line of argument relates to home observatories that are great in terms of access but invariably sub optimal in terms of seeing and light conditions.

I guess I could go on philosophising forever on this topic, but not necessarily come to any conclusion if in fact there is a conclusion to be had.

What I would like to hear from other imagers is an answer to the fundamental philosophical question “What do I really enjoy about astroimaging, and how do I go about maximising that enjoyment”. I don’t want to turn this into a pissing contest between low cost and high cost solutions. Let us assume that cost is no object. Astroimaging costs not only money but time away from other activities in life. Surely there must be a satisfactory satisfactional return and that must be dependent on certain parameters. I would like to really understand what those are.

If you have not fallen asleep reading this then I would welcome your feedback.

Cheers
Chris

[Paddy]

Hi Chris and welcome to IIS. I can't respond to your post from an imaging perspective as I am only into visual observing and I'm quite happy to look at other people's wonderful images. I'd be going for the big dob myself. I think though that your post is very interesting and the thing that I would add is that you have separated the components of your interest ie results, camaraderie, equipment and optics challenges etc. Maybe the combination matters. For me if I were to go into imaging, all would be important and I would not be very happy with results that are not good quality, but it wouldn't just be results that would drive me.

Just some thoughts from the sideline.

[bmitchell82]

Very interesting this thread should come about, what is my drive? what is my passion about? sometimes i ask myself this but to me it comes down to some key points

- Im technically minded, having something to tinker with makes ME happy and gives me something to occupy my spare time with.

- To produce the very best that i can with the equipment given, it makes me feel proud when i have produced a excellent image

- Think creatively not just take another photo.

[DJDD]

Thanks, Chris, for the thought provoking thread.
I just started down the imaging path when I took up further study thus curtailing my imaging experience.

However, for me what drew me to imaging was the level of engagement in astroimaging that was missing in visual astronomy.

For visual astronomy, other than swapping eyepieces, i could not get "closer" to the object than i already was and there was no real way for me to improve any skills (I realise that with more experience you can see more but that must end somewhere).

Whereas with imaging there is constant improvement, both in setting up the equipment and post-processing, as well as feeling that you have more "impact" upon the results of the session.

anyway, that may not have been explained well...

It will be interesting to hear from other people as I really just started down the path when I stopped... now I just try to get out to do some visual observing when I can.

[Moon]

Chris
That is a great first post - welcome to IIS.
I see it something like this:

regards
James

[netwolf]

It is the journey and the people you meet along the way.

Earth is not flat, Earth not centre of universe, Eart moves around the sun, the Sun moves around the galaxy............................ We continue a journey that began before us and those who come after will continue the journey beyond our understanding. So we leave footprints behind and become history.

[avandonk]

Chris I think netwolf said it first 'it is the journey not the destination'.

I like to tinker and make 'cheap' equipment perform better by radical modification. It keeps my mind and body active. There is not much fun in modifying top of the range stuff as you would most probably make it perform below factory settings.

Astrophotography must be the most demanding and frustrating of all photographic pursuits. It is this that makes it very satisfying when you have a minor 'win'.

It is a bit like golf where you have expensive equipment that even in experienced hands don't give consistent results.

You are really just testing yourself against yourself.

How many books have you read where the hero/ine faces many challenging tasks/situations that only have the effect of making them win the final challenge because of these experiences.

Can you really face the ultimate monster without a few practice bouts with his minions?

Finally it is what YOU make of it yourself.

Bert

[troypiggo]

I've been thinking about this very thing and was going to post about it soon, but you beat me to it.

Conclusion I came to was that I love the way it combines photography, astronomy, computing, image processing all together. You need to be extremely methodical. There's quite a bit of technical stuff to know and practise.

I love photography, but don't like (what I perceive as) the pressure of shooting people. I'm not that artistic, but I know the technical side of photography and composition. I like shooting things that you don't normally see with the naked eye, that's why I think I'm drawn to astro and macro photography. Both are presenting subjects that you can't make out to that sort of detail with the naked eye.

I love technical things. Putting this with that to get a result, put it with something else to get a different result. Tweaking equipment. Learning new photoshop tips and tricks for image processing.

As you mention, striving to achieve the best possible image with the gear you have.

All of the above.

[bojan]

I stopped philosophising about this long time ago.. actually it was never part of my thinking...

The process goes something like this:

1) I want to achieve something useful (take a series of pics of nova for example, to obtain the light curve)
2) could it be done with what I have already and with minimal tinkering?
3) IF yes, then I do it. IF no, what do I need to achieve the goal? (Financial budget is minimal, or non-existent for the start (it can increase, though).. however, the crap yards and used/wasted equipment and DIY are acceptable ways to proceed)
4) Are results acceptable? (for me... I am trying not to be driven by standards of my peers and general community.. especially sellers of astro equipment.. because this, contrary to general thinking, is just distracting me from my original direction, and only increases cost, both in time spent and money wasted, which could be used for more useful things. I want to be in control of this hobby, and not allowing the hobby to take control of me - if this is possible at all).
5) IF yes good :-) IF NO, GOTO 1 (sometimes this step is with goals redefined)

Never ending loop.......

[troypiggo]

But Bojan, you've posted how you go about your imaging, not why.

Why are you drawn to astroimaging? What makes it attractive to you?

[bojan]

But I did :)
Astroimaging for me is a tool to achieve something useful ( item 1) ).
It is not a goal per se.

[g__day]

For me I operate in quanta. For a period of years I can put down so much cash, I have so much time, there is so much I want to learn and folk I want to interact with and learn or share learning with. That is my quanta. Those terms define my options.

Where does the joy arrive? Well from planning and executing the best series of progressions I can amongst those quanta. I backyard observe from a home made observatory. I remote control all my gear. My pointing, focus and tracking are excellent for my gear's cost.

So now its about learning photoshop and better techniques to process images (the way Jase can) before I move up to better imaging gear and or quality refractor land.

I don't feel the need to be Hubble or operate Keck, but I do like gluing ten bits of gear together, planning my targets, having it all come together and being able to campaign it out and still spend lots of time with my family.

It's a hobby for me - if there was a black box solution that did it all perfectly - it would lessen the enjoyment.

[Peter Ward]

A brave posting Chris, but applying the Socratic method, I would dispute the Hubble is the be-all-and-end-all of astronomical imaging.

There is a vast ocean of superb astronmical imagery out there, that the Hubble due its narrow field of view, is simply is not suited to.

Deep sky images can and do benefit from taking a wider view (Martin's recent STX image of M31 comes to mind) plus eclipses, auora, star trails, wide & ultra wide field that are not even on Hubble's resume'

Having the right tool for the job does make life easier, and I'm sure drives many astroimagers through some not inexpensive equipment upgrades....but this is by no means the only end to some very creative, and beautiful imagery that can be taken with some very basic tools.

As the old saying goes: a skilled tradesman never blames his tools.

[dugnsuz]

I do it because it remains fun and I still get excited about the images I can produce. I'm less passionate about the gear and steep, expensive upgrade paths - I've found that each upgrade brings with it technical challenges which focuses me away from the creative enjoyment I get from the hobby. KISS theory advocate here!
That said, I do try to maximize (and push) the potential of my setup where I can (given tight budget!) - feel like I haven't even scratched the surface in that regard.
Great thread - thanks.
Doug

[Octane]

Chicks dig it.

[Paul Haese]

Making cool images. Simple as that is my answer. I don't care about the journey crap. I have been in the hobby since 9 and now I am nearly 46. The journey stuff just does not wash anymore. The telescopes and cameras are a means to an end as far as I am concerned. I have always loves photography and astrophotography is just one aspect of my interest. Getting good images is what drives me in this field. The better the gear you have the better the chance of attaining that goal. Just my opinion.

[sjastro]

I get the opposite reaction.

When I tell women I image heavenly bodies with a telescope they think I am a pervert aiming for the neighbour's window instead of the skies.

Steven

[tlgerdes]

I take you are single Humayan, wives dont "Dig" it, they put up with it.:rofl:

Just ask Multiweb what his wife thinks of his C11 "Big John":lol::lol:

[Octane]

lol, guys, I was being facetious. :P

For me, I'd have to side with Troy and Paul.

I have been interested in photography for a long time, about half my life, and, astrophotography was a natural progression.

People like Dr. Gendler, Jennings, Ward, Davis, Pugh, Croman, Block, Gabany, et al., serve as inspirations. Whilst I'll never own the equipment they do, I will endeavour to push what modest equipment I have to its limit. This is also a reason why I engage in this obsessive hobby; to see how far I can go. :thumbsup:

Regards,
Humayun

[lacad01]

What a great thread :) I am by no means an imager but am slowly building up the gear to be able to plunge into that world.
I've asked myself the same questions as to why but it has to be in the journey and process as other people have already mentioned otherwise to a certain extent it loses its attraction.
For me I look forward to capturing and processing images that I can in no way pursue visually from my light polluted location. There's just something special about getting involved hands on than doing it vicariously :)

[troypiggo]

Jeez, so many people using the word "journey" - I thought for a minute I was watching "Biggest Loser" or "Australian Idol". Hahaha. :)

[avandonk]

My "journey" really began when I started at Kodak Research Laboratories in 1968. The hierarchy deigned that I should learn sensitometry, densitometry and human colour perception. I then worked for CSIRO for thirty years in one of the top labs in the world. In my twilight years I am using all the knowledge gained over a lifetime.

To equate this with a bunch of morons on a TV show is distasteful to say the least.

troypiggo you are very obviously just at the start of your 'journey' and you do have a lot to learn and understand.


Bert

[troypiggo]

Bert, sorry mate. You've misunderstood my "journey" comment. The only similarity I was drawing between those TV shows and this thread was the use of the term "journey" a lot. Every episode that I've watched of those shows someone says "journey". The "hahahah" and the smiley was intended to tip you off that it was a light-hearted comment not to be taken seriously. I meant no disrespect to anyone posting here, and certainly don't think I said anything distasteful.

There's no doubt I'm new to all things astro, and I don't pretend to be anything but. Even at subjects that I am learned and knowledgeable about, I am still humble enough to accept that I'll continue to build on that knowledge. Despite what my mummy says, I'm not perfect.

[marc4darkskies]

Great thread Chris - and I love your reductionist approach to this question - you must be a scientist! :lol:. (No worries, I was one of those too once! (ex-CSIRO))

Journey, destination I hear people say?.... who cares!! Everything we do requires a journey and there is always a destination so using these words to describe why we image the night sky is totally inadequate IMO. It belies the passion and wonder most of us feel when we look up on a dark night.

This is how it was for me. I wanted to take world class amateur deep sky astroimages! Why? because I've dreamt of doing that since I was 10. Why? Because I've always been in awe of the scale and majesty of this universe and passionate about wanting to capture a teensy little piece of it, in all it's glory, for myself and to share with others.

Ergo, my rationale is actually the contrary of your first conclusion. Do I enjoy buying, playing with, using and talking about telescopes? Yes. Do I enjoy spending endless hours on a computer with processing software to refine techniques and get the image just right? Well, of course, I enjoy the journey. But without being able to produce a top class image at the end, the journey would be pointless and I hate doing something for nothing.

Cheers, Marcus

[cwjohn]

All good responses. Yes it seems that there are a lot of journeys going on together with a lot of motherhood statements expressed.

I was hoping for as KRudd says a little more programatic specifity, but that is obviously my fault in the way I expressed the question.

Take for example the humble astronomical equatorial mount. Now I have owned a GM8, G11, Titan, EM-200, HEQ 5 so I know a little about the subject.

The HEQ6, the most sold mount in the world is on the face of all things that matter at $2K a godsend. It integrates nicely into a holistic system. it has bags of software support and nicely managed and mollykoddled it seems to do the job really well, but invariably at a certain weight point, which we wont argue here it seems to struggle and in conversations I see many imagers expressing a good deal of frustration. One of my current mounts the Tak Em-200 is smaller than the HEQ6 but I seem to be able to stack weight on it with almost no limit and it performs well. Unfortunately it is pretty much a dog to integrate into a holisitic system. Unquestionably you get what you pay for but also unquestionably the cost goes up exponentially in terms of performance gained.

It is not my intent in saying this to address the cost vs performance benefits of mounts as I know this has been dealt with in other threads. My intent is to explore the philosopy of why we consider these alternative strategies.

You could equally apply this to many other aspects of astro imaging. For instance Wodaski and deReght have a nice dialogue on Wodaski's site (I think) on the relative merits of high end optics vs Meade integrated optics although I notice they both opt for astro cooled cameras. The point is that de Reght argues that there is just as much satisfaction from making the flaky Meade system image friendly than Ron gains from his high end equipment.

Certainly, from my perspective in graduating from an EM-200 to a Losmandy Titan I found the upgrade to be highly satisfying in terms of performance, integration and weight bearing capacity and this enhanced satisfaction markedly. Interestingly I sold the Titan (which I regret) and kept the EM-200 because it was a lighter and more portable mount.

Further the issue of optics always fascinates me in that simple math in regard to the perfect optic will determine that there is little to be gained given certain seeing conditions beyond a certain aperture, and often CCD pixel sizes poorly match the optic. In this regard one is prone to ask "what is the motivating factor here because it aint rigourous scientific analysis" but anyway I digress.

I would be interested in finding out the answer to this question. If you inherited $100K and had no mortgage and a wife who made no claims to it (an impossibility I know but lets assume for the sake of the exercise) and you had no current equipment, how much would you devote to astroimaging, what would you buy in general rather than specific terms and why and when I say why what exactly are you attempting to approve or achieve?

As some responders have noted here philosophical navel gazing is not part of their psyche to wit they are classic existentialists, but there may be some out there who are prepared to spend 5 minutes contemplating this question.

Thanks in advance

Chris

[marc4darkskies]

You're now asking a completely different question Chris. The first philosophical question seemed to be what do you enjoy about astroimaging and why? - an easy question to answer. This second one seems to be what equipment would you buy!? There's hardly a philosophical point to make here as most people spend what they can afford according to what goal they have. What's your goal?

In any case $100k is enough to indulge this hobby to a reasonably high standard for most goals! :lol:

Cheers, Marcus

[Moon]

The problem is choice, the red pill or the blue pill? There is no formula with an answer for you.
It's your free will and you will be morally accountable if you spend vast sums of money. Just as you will be morally accountable if you choose a cheap mount that does not satisfy you! You can ask me what I think, and I will say call Mr Ward and spend $60K of your $100k. But I don't have to live with your decision do I?

Let me ask you this question: If you bought an EQ6 it did not perform as you wanted, how long before you upgraded to a Titan again? Would this process of testing out, trying to fix and finally eliminating the EQ6, ordering and taking the delivery of the Titan bring you satisfaction? Or would you be upset that you lost money on the EQ6 and wasted some time?


Maybe this is true, but perhaps your satisfaction IS about learning about Astrophotography.

[cwjohn]

Marcus

Actually my orignal question was "What do I really enjoy about astroimaging, and how do I go about maximising that enjoyment."

Most people responded to the first part because as you said "it is easy to answer" but none really answered the second part which was my stated intent. My fault admittedly because I did not define the question specifically. I am attempting to do so here.

It appears to me that in starting the hobby one makes an assessment of the necessary resources applicable to the hobby. Then as one progresses there are a series of choices which one makes in terms of return vs satisfaction which plainly revolve around resource. Having posed this question many times I get a clear sense that most people cannot rationalise these decisions clearly.

For instance you already leap to the assumption that on inheriting $100K you would spend it all on astroimaging. Is this in fact the case. I certainly would not. I have many other interests upon which these funds would be allocated. If I inherited $100K I would immediately allocate funds to a number of activies and come to some conclusions as to general approaches and goals that I could achieve in the astro imaging sector. So would I spend $10K, $20K, $30K and examine how would this expenditure impact my enjoyment in the hobby. It seems to me that this gives a more practical insight into how people maximise their enjoyment. Possibly my thought processes are unique in this regard. If so nothing venture, nothing gained.

I hope that helps.
Chris

[cwjohn]

James

"morally accountable" - to whom. I dont quite see where morals come into the equation. Certainly fiscally accountable to oneself and to family.

The question you pose is a complex one. It entirely depends on the reason WHY I bought the EQ6. The EQ6 may be merely a means to an end in terms of a greater holistic goal, or in fact it may be a matter of attempting to push the boundaries that much further than the specifications. There could be a strong argument that the enjoyment is derived from the setting of the goal and the subsequent achievement of that goal.

As I said all existentialists feel free to pass this thread by. I am just the sort of person who tends to self examine why he does what he does. Understanding those of a similar mind helps to understand ones own though processes in this regard.

[Jim McAloon]

Back to the original question...

It’s a challenge – given the interest in astronomy, the question is, what can I do with the equipment I have (which is reasonably good midrange stuff, yes, Imaging Source, Canon 300D, Synta, Orion, Guan Sheng, and Celestron). This applies both visually and photographically. Nothing is ‘achieved’ by making out 3C273 in a ten inch dob, but it feels good to have done so. It’s also nice, again and again, to go back to the Silver Coin and think of Caroline Herschel, or to look at dozens of bright and familiar objects, as well as fainter objects observed for the first time.

So far as planetary and lunar imaging are concerned, as with all the nature photography I do as well, the first question is, does the image make me think, yes, that’s got it. The criteria are usually very different, of course, between nature and astrophotography, but not entirely. Technical excellence is a big part of it – sharpness, detail, and so on, but I hope for something just a little bit different. There is always the outside chance of seeing something significant on the giant planets, as well. But visual appeal is a significant part of it, as also is the fact that it’s my image, no one else’s. That applies particularly with a widely photographed event like a lunar eclipse, and I am even attached to my colour negative images of Comet McNaught (after that, I bought a 300D!).

When looking at others’ deep sky images of familiar objects, I look for something that makes me think, yes, that makes me see M42 or whatever just a little bit differently. The handful of deep sky images I have taken have been about learning the tricks, and developing the skills. But the intention is to take images which I, at least, find pleasing.

The use of relatively modest equipment, purchased incrementally, is a personal preference, but only in terms of what I can justify to myself in terms of my own ethics and priorities, including how much time astronomy gets among all the other things I do.

keep looking up!

[Bassnut]

Im not sure that is the case Chris. 1st, isnt satisfaction the return?, why the "vs".

And I dont think satisfaction is based on "resource". Ive been lucky enough to experience both ends of the resource expence equation, and I found satisfaction at a given time has little to do with expence, it can be very satisfing to get the max out of what you have. In fact extracting the most from the least, can be very satisfing indeed, despite the urge for better gear generally.

Having said that, it is human nature to progress from your last triumph to something better, which often involves more expence, to maintain the satisfaction level (I hope that makes sense :P).

Satisfaction is a fluid thing, that changes and matures over time,with funds, expectations and experience, you cant materially quantify it down to a particular time meaningfully (ie as a question right now, to define forever a particular persons definition), it will be different tomorrow, we all await the next upgrade :).

[cwjohn]

Jim - Beautifully crafted response. You certainly made me think about the subject a little differently.

Bass - absolutely, poor choice of words on my part. I agree with your comments totally. I came back from cooled CCD to DSLRs for a couple of years. Very interesting to see what one could achieve with limited resources. Indeed it was a means to an end in itself.

Chris

[Jim McAloon]

Thanks Chris... your thoughtful opening post in particular made me think, which is always good.

cheers, jim

[jase]

Interesting thread. Given everyone has different motives, there is no incorrect answer. Though, Humayun, you'll need to introduce me to the girls you hang out with.;):lol: Any discussion of imaging is the equivalent of buying a clothes iron for your wife's birthday - you're asking for trouble.

This is the key to being successful. In other words if you really enjoy what you do and do it often, you'll become better and better at it. Make no mistakes, there is no substitute for experience, not even money. Your desire to be successful is the catalyst which will in turn define the milestones to reach the goals. Experience is obtained along the way.

This rings true for astrophotography. Too often people dip their toe to test the waters only to be scared off. Jump straight in, but do so within your means and interest. Imaging takes commitment if your intent is deliver results that you are proud of. Logically, if you see it as a chore and don't really enjoy it, chances of success will be grim.

Parting thought...you're as only as good as your last image.

Pushing the limits of equipment and knowledge along with helping others achieve greater heights. I am fortunate having friends who work with Photoshop all day long. When I catch up with them, I'm regularly picking their brains (much to their disgust I imagine). Such discussions appear to flow as general banter around the bbq with beer in hand. Those who know me or haven't already guessed, equipment for me is a means to getting the data. Data is all I care about, not watching the equipment do its thing. I've spent more than enough time tweaking this and tinkering that when it comes to astro gear. I've got my own robotic set up at a dark sky location and use rental scopes which simply add to the imaging arsenal. I get the same thrill of processing a data set today as I did years ago. Focus remains on the end result.