Quote:
Originally Posted by Garyh
I can understand both sides to this argument and both Peter and Jase have merit in what they say..
I think this will have to be addressed in some way in the CWAS categories as all images are judged blind by David with no knowledge of how the data was acquired and what equipment was used..
I think a good solution would be to put a focal length to each category and maybe split deepsky images into two categories ?
Say.
Widefield is <300mm
Deepsky widefield 300mm to 1200mm
Deepsky Narrowfield <1200mm
This would help bundle setups and scopes that are more similar regardless if acquired via renta scopes or by the owner of the gear..
Also would open up opportunities for the more cash strapped imagers out there with small scopes like the ED80 or similar regardless of ccds or DSLR`s.
cheer Gary
|
Nah far too messy IMO mate
. I say keep it as it is and just slip the remote data aquisition into the semi Pro division - easy.
If people like Martin Pugh and others can afford to have their own CCD + image rotator + Adaptive Optics + RC + robotic mount all controlled by CCD autopilot etc then so be it, they are not semi proffessional by trade ie they earn no taxable income per se and they are not just paying for the data direct.
Mike