I'm a little uncomfortable with this thread/poll...thing.
IMHO It's like we are trying to separate ourselves into "camps".... based on whether one uses their own eyes or uses other means to observe.
Pretty soon there'll be a PushTO "V" GOTO debate... sheish.... This is probably the reason I have not voted .
Look!... there are visual observers, video observers, webcam observers, DSLR observers, CCD observers and..... The key word is "Observers". We observe the sky. Some take measurements, some make records of a particular region of the sky at a particular moment, some chase the most difficult or the faintest, or the coolest. Some simply wish to share their sky experience with others. The choice of photon collector is simply governed by the best method to achieve the desired result.
For me, I'm a video observer. I can utilise my camera's sensitivity and 25 frames per second attributes to determine when an occultation occurs, making it possible to give an event time to an accuracy of +/- 0.02 seconds. This can't be done visually which at best can only be relied on to +/- 0.1 seconds, and that is for a VERY experienced observer in prime conditions. This does NOT mean that visual observations of occultations is inferior and therefore are worth less than a video observation. The fact is ALL observations of an occultation event are valuable.
The point is that the choice of photon collector has nothing to do with declaration that one is an observer,
or not.
thew, I feel now...
