Quote:
Originally Posted by cwjohn
....... What behoves us to want to spend ever increasing amounts of funds in search of even greater quality of images NONE of which will come within a bulls roar of the quality of a Hubble image.....
|
A brave posting Chris, but applying the Socratic method, I would dispute the Hubble is the be-all-and-end-all of astronomical imaging.
There is a vast ocean of superb astronmical imagery out there, that the Hubble due its narrow field of view, is simply is not suited to.
Deep sky images can and do benefit from taking a wider view (Martin's recent STX image of M31 comes to mind) plus eclipses, auora, star trails, wide & ultra wide field that are not even on Hubble's resume'
Having the right tool for the job does make life easier, and I'm sure drives many astroimagers through some not inexpensive equipment upgrades....but this is by no means the only end to some very creative, and beautiful imagery that can be taken with some very basic tools.
As the old saying goes: a skilled tradesman never blames his tools.