Full marks to Omaroo and the Iceinspace team for putting together the first IIS Compendium! Indeed, it may well be the first of this sort of thing ever produced in this country by an astronomical community, so everyone deserves a huge pat on the back.
I am keen to see this idea developed and grown to be the best it can be, and to set a shining example to the astronomical community world-wide. So, with that motivation in mind, I thought it worth having a thread to consider ways we could improve things next year.
May I say to Omaroo in particular, mate, that I do not want you to hear any criticism of you personally - I think you have done a fabulous job, and I take my hat off to you. I could not have come up with something like this in a million years, so thanks for your huge efforts and contribution. It is inspirational that this has actually happened - normally these ideas are discussed, but no one actually pulls out their finger to get it done.
So, here are my thoughts:
1. The compendium in its current form only provides an opportunity for astrophotographers from the IIS community to contribute. For those of us (who appear to be in the minority these days) who are avid visual astronomers, it would be good to have the chance to have our observing notes published as well. I would love to publish some notes of, say, a galaxy cluster. If we plan a bit next year, we could co-ordinate submissions of observing notes with images, or even get some images taken to go with observing notes of particular areas of the sky. Some of the observing notes could even be taken from observing notes posted during the year on the forum (with the writer's permission, of course).
2. Point 1 leads into my concern about the Compendium in its current form, that it does not provide any particular information about each object which would assist someone not so familiar with the night sky to understand what they are looking at. The first edition, of course, was produced with an expectation that only the "in crowd" would want to buy it. Given how much interest there has been in it, I think it would be good to start with the assumption for 2010 that there will be a wider audience, including family and friends (such as Christmas presents - I bought 2 compendia this year with the intention of giving one away), so we should endeavour to explain what the image is that we are looking at (eg that NGC 253 is a spiral galaxy so many light years in diameter and so many light years away in the constellation of Sculptor). I note that a few objects have some information - notably Centaurus A - I assume Mike Sidonio went to the trouble of providing this - good stuff, mate! This information will be of more interest to most than technical data about what equipment was used to create the image (it is all gobbledegook to me).
3. It would be good to include some ephemera so that the publication is of practical use. I note that this year Andrew James kindly offered to help contribute in this way, but his offer was not taken up. Having ephemera instantly widens the net of who might be interested in purchasing the publication - dare I say it, but visual observers, and not just astrophotographers, will be more enthused.
4. I like the idea that John Bambury expressed when the Compendium was first being discussed that perhaps there could be different catergories, with people entering their work and competing, with certain images being recognised as stand-outs. Without wishing to cause any offence, there are a few entries in the compendium that really are not up to publication - I know the idea is to reflect the full scope of abilities in the community, but we can recognise beginners in ways other than publishing what is clearly below par images. It is good to recognise the really outstanding achievements of those who are pushing the boundaries of amateur photography.
5. There are lots of typos in the publication. For example, on a number of occasions Eta Carinae is misspelt, NGC 253 is called NGC 254 etc. It may be worth proof reading by a few more people next year.
6. I was surprised how small the publication was. It really is rather like a slim-line Ikea catalogue in appearance. I for one would like to see some of those fabulous long exposure images blown up to a larger scale!!
Those are my thoughts (I say bracing myself). What say you??
