|
Back to the original question...
It’s a challenge – given the interest in astronomy, the question is, what can I do with the equipment I have (which is reasonably good midrange stuff, yes, Imaging Source, Canon 300D, Synta, Orion, Guan Sheng, and Celestron). This applies both visually and photographically. Nothing is ‘achieved’ by making out 3C273 in a ten inch dob, but it feels good to have done so. It’s also nice, again and again, to go back to the Silver Coin and think of Caroline Herschel, or to look at dozens of bright and familiar objects, as well as fainter objects observed for the first time.
So far as planetary and lunar imaging are concerned, as with all the nature photography I do as well, the first question is, does the image make me think, yes, that’s got it. The criteria are usually very different, of course, between nature and astrophotography, but not entirely. Technical excellence is a big part of it – sharpness, detail, and so on, but I hope for something just a little bit different. There is always the outside chance of seeing something significant on the giant planets, as well. But visual appeal is a significant part of it, as also is the fact that it’s my image, no one else’s. That applies particularly with a widely photographed event like a lunar eclipse, and I am even attached to my colour negative images of Comet McNaught (after that, I bought a 300D!).
When looking at others’ deep sky images of familiar objects, I look for something that makes me think, yes, that makes me see M42 or whatever just a little bit differently. The handful of deep sky images I have taken have been about learning the tricks, and developing the skills. But the intention is to take images which I, at least, find pleasing.
The use of relatively modest equipment, purchased incrementally, is a personal preference, but only in terms of what I can justify to myself in terms of my own ethics and priorities, including how much time astronomy gets among all the other things I do.
keep looking up!
|