|
I get that. I really do. But without an alternative no matter the aperture you stretch things out to, the image quality will always be poor, and ultimately disappoint if humans eyes are the only tool used.
Look, it is only an alternative addition to the status quo I have put forward. But I still see no one arguing the case that one will actually see as much or more with the larger scopes originally proposed for Observatory Hill, and that they will be viable visual instruments long term.
As a die hard visual devotee of astronomy, it saddens me the situation faced at Observtory Hill. I don't care for C3PO telescope or R2D2 cameras. Nor have I mentioned any. I just want the best decision to be made with ALL alternatives given a fair hearing. Help was asked for, and it will come in many forms, and sometimes not the ones that are expected or originally considered.
All the best with Observatory Hill, Geoff. You are in one heck of a situation.
|