Quote:
Originally Posted by rat156
I now rarely comment on others images mainly because of the comments like Ken's vitriolic replies that Peter has had to put up with. I believe, at least in this thread that Peter was merely pointing out something that can be fixed easily. Something beginners may not know.
|
It's not the fact that Peter gave a great tip for a simple colour adjutment. That's fine.
It just carries that implication that if an image isn't the correct colour, it isn't very good.
It's just that it has that 'put-down' feel like some of these samples of other posts by Peter:
"If you want to have a bit of fun and don't take astro imaging seriously, get the EQ5/6" .
"The small sample of EQ6's I've tested ran at about +/- 50 arc sec....and landing on a chip after a 150 degree slew? ...give me a break"
For his 1st quote, does that mean that those of us with EQ5 or 6 are not trying to be serious about our imaging????
For his 2nd quote, I'm not the only one with dead accurate GoTo's on an EQ6.
I slew all over the sky all night and get spot-on GoTo's, and that it with a Toucam which is equivelent to a 6mm EP. That's Damn good accuracy! Give
me a break!
Peter, you are probably dead right in all that you say, but sometimes the wording is very discouraging. It has the feeling that you are putting down others attempts.
You may not mean to do this, but it comes across that way.
Some of the replies from others to some of your previous posts should indicate that:
*On the topic of winning awards - if the only way to win an award is to use high end equipment then I would have to question what it is that is being awarded? Unfortunately however, often this may be the case. I think it sends a bad message though to those who may choose to submit images using cheaper equipment. (why even bother if high end equipment always wins?)
*this thread is pointless, if it is going to be a bickering session between the very experienced.
*Not that i mind a good discussion, I feel too that some will be discouraged in submitting there work because it doesn't come up to standard.
*No insult or anything else towards Peter, great images and all that, But how can he even start to compare his images taken with his semi professional gear to the average amateur on this site.
*I will post mine and you post yours let the viewer decide " is in my opinion getting a bit childish. Naturally His images have to be better, otherwise what a waste. The more experienced amateur on this site would love to have Peters equipment, I am sure. But this ‘my images are better then yours’ is ludicrous.
*What really gets me going is the way some people throw around all these obscure theorums that try to prove that they are smarter than the next guy, (see earlier posts), and because of this they must be better astrophotographers.
*IIS is an amateur forum I assume formed to help us newbies (as we all were once) increase our knowledge and if wanted our photographic skills.
I love Peter Wards images and a lot of others peoples too but this forum in itself is not an imaging competition, we look or at least I do, at the pics submitted and relating them to the gear used judge them on that.
*Are Peters images spectacular when compared to his gear? l don't know.
Are EzyStyles images spectacular with his gear? you bet your a**e they are, how do l know? because l can relate to the gear and other images taken with similar gear, and let it not be forgotten these two probably have about a 30 year gap in experience. l use Eric as an example only and could have used many others, hope Eric dosen't mind.
Many of us didn't know a thing about astrophotography 2 years ago and l for one am more than happy with my progress as other are no doubt happy with theirs Ken, Barb & Dave as examples, if those that think their knowledge is superior want to banter amongst themselves fine but do it privately please, this is l think still an amateur forum.
*Well Peter I hope you are wrong on that score. I seriously hope we stop seeing competitions where the winner to every category is an Takahashi 6 inch refractor on a Tak mount.
*As mentioned by others previously it is not too hard to consider the relative merit considering the equipment used. Who would be bothered submitting images while such a view exists unless they own a Takahashi. (sorry about the thread diversion here but I think it is an important point because it is a hobby and even an achromat on an Eq6 is mighty expensive - and many of us are not flush with money to afford the great gear).
*Wasn't the winner of the last David Malin award a picture of comet McNaught through a camera lens? I wonder if it was an apo or an achromatic camera lens? (or indeed if it should matter). If its ok to take images through an achromatic camera lenses why not achromatic telescopes? Another was a picture of the moon in colour - very imaginative. I dont think these won due to the fancy equipment used for the large part.
*I personally think forget the mount and equipment creep, focus on the technical aspects of the imaging and be happy as there is always better equipment (and you can always download HST images if you really want perfection).
As mentioned elsewhere in here and other Forums, text messages can be misconstrued in meaning coz it is hard to replace every emotion with a smilie. So my hope is, Peter, that you are not putting down the efforts of many because of their 'cheap' gear.