|
I’m not too certain of what is taken into account Peter. I’d like to hope you’re correct in that your two points mentioned are considered. However, I have my doubts. You are typically judged on the finished product (your point 2), not the journey in getting there. Thus, how you reached the result is of little consequence, whether it is imaged locally or remotely… and is it really anyone’s business to know where the data was collected. All you are asked is the type of telescope used, exposure times, processing tools.
I feel Martin nailed it in his opening statement “For me, it is unfortunate that David does not consider equipment used, time spent, effort levied, prevailing conditions (i.e object never above 30 degrees altitude) when judging the competition.” Hmmm interesting. Do you think David realised the trouble I went to in the NGC6357 & NGC6334 photo considering I took data from two different focal lengths (FSQ & TOA-150), struggling with equipment (taken locally I should add) and spent another ~12 hours processing the image? If it’s measured on various technical aspects of data collection, then surely Eddie’s Eta mosaic would have came out as the overall winner. It is clear that the end result is all that counts.
We can debate the use of rental scopes all day long. There is undoubtedly a stigma around using such services which to be blatantly honest amuses me. Remote rental facilities aren’t exclusive; anyone can buy time on them so I’d question the advantage one imager has over another. After all, everyone has access to the equipment. It’s their choice should they choose to utilise the facilities. Sure, affordability maybe a limiting factor, however so is that next generation large format CCD camera or 6” APO that has the potential to lift an imagers output quality and provide the so-called distinct advantage claims being made here about remote imaging. Cost validation is identical in both circumstances so it’s a mute point – there are no advantages. There is nothing stopping you or anyone else collecting hi resolution luminance data on a rental scope and combining with RGB they’ve collected on their own scope. It’s about making use of the technologies at hand to deliver an end result that the imager is proud to display – rental scope or not.
Don't mix commercial with professional Mike. The two don't always correlate. Its the use of data which often determines whether its professional or not.
|