Quote:
Originally Posted by iceman
Funny though, I noticed on another forum someone saying that "prudence" suggests one should not have included themselves. But then in the same topic thread on a different forum, that same person includes themselves in a list of top planetary imagers running close on Damian Peach's heels. 
|
I feel I have to respond here. What I have to say will no doubt ruffle some feathers but I think this needs to be said. I am not doing this to cause trouble, just I want to respond to this comment. It is not my intention to cause trouble.
That would be me you are quoting here Mike. I said this because, in the eyes of many you are not in the top ten astroimagers in Australia. You inferred that you knew this yourself. There is no doubt that your articles and talks have helped many. Your work of the last two years has been solid but certainly not as good as some, that includes Solar, Lunar, Deep Space and Planetary. That is the reason I said prudence would suggest that you not include yourself.
I did include myself in the top ten of planetary imagers because my images are of such detail and have been commented upon by many respected imagers including Damian himself. I have no qualms about including myself in the top ten planetary imagers, but this is based on my results in the last two years. Those that beg to differ are more than welcome to visit my site
http://paulhaese.net and compare for themselves.
In terms of the top ten Australian astrophotographers (this is a broad term, it may well include many aspects of the hobby), well who knows. Probably not. As many have said there are many people who are far better than a lot of people on your list but never even got mentioned. Not having website, or being published makes it hard to know about them. You said this much yourself. Additionally do you say for one field, for a variety of fields or do you say as an all rounder. The definition of Astrophotographer is difficult. Or should it be by what sort of equipment one owns?
You are right it is your list and your criteria. Awards and publications are one thing I suppose, but not all people publicise their awards and publications. For some it does not matter. I personally have been published well over 30 times but could not care less what the exact number is or with which publication. It is just not that important in the scheme of things. What matters to me is quality in terms of images, not in quantity or frequency of being published.
I hope this is not seen as an argumentative thing, I just wanted to reply to your remarks. I guess we will have to agree to disagree in this matter.