I have been enjoying reading my old Sky and Telescope magazines from the mid-late 1980's, a time when Australia did not have it's own amateur astronomy magazine. From memory, Sky and Space commenced around 1988 and AS&T shortly after.
I have made some interesting observations from the articles and advertisments so I thought I'd share some of them in a series of posts here at Ice In Space.
No references to websites or "imaging" LOL
Lots of articles and adverts about hypersensitising film for optimum performance.
Some companies advertised their scopes with long-legged models beside them!
A lot less color advertisements, many in black and white.
Regular columns for BASIC computer programs relating to astronomy, such as calculating cometary and planetary orbits.
Many new scopes on the market with "computer" drives and pre-GOTO electronics.
Of course many articles 20 years ago are still relevant and have links to today's pursuits by amateur astronomers. I hope to scan many of my interesting finds and I'll post them in the near future.
To start off with this one, an article from S&T 1987. I know today that imaging the International Space Station is a challenge to some, but can be achieved when the time and conditions are right. I know of some results posted on IIS and elsewhere.
"...a time when Australia did not have it's own amateur astronomy magazine..."
Not true - we did, and several well worth a read - via the local astronomical societies, notably ASNSW and several others.
Of course individual astronomical clubs and societies have always had their own publiciations, but I am referring to publications such as mass produced, glossy, such as Sky and Telescope, Astronomy, Astronomy Now etc. Magazines which were known nationally and internationally. Thanks.
Here is another ad from S&T in 1988, from a company selling CCD cameras! Check out the prices. I think it is pretty amazing how technology has advanced in recent years.
You seem to have stirred the pot Steve, I have spent a good part of the afternoon browsing through some of the ones I just unearthed out of the shed, very interesting, looking back on some of the old adds, and stories.
This will keep my going for some time to come, I reckon.
Nice finds. And for the computer heads here, interesting to see the CCD software for Commodore 64 / 128, oh and Apple II
In my youth I was an avid C-64 & Amiga fan but alas hadn't discovered astronomy back then
I have a full collection of S&T, back to Issue 1, Vol 1, Nov 1941.
As you go back further you see the changing trends Unitron refractors, lots of ATM ( I mean grinding your own mirror) and Kellner and "top of the range" Orthoscopics eyepieces.
What it does give is a snapshot of the "cutting edge" technologies of the time and articles on research, new telescope constructions, ie the Lick "big yellow" etc as well as Scott Houston's monthly guides... great stuff.
1: Was the theory that you get the model with every scope purchase (like the sports cars at the motor show)???
2: Computer control for your scope circa 1987 for only $4885 USD.
3: Ummm.... would these binocular supports be as effective on men as well as women?
Thanks all for posting those old ads and thoughts -- which I've enjoyed reading greatly.
The approach by various manufacturers to their advertisements in the 70s, 80s and to an extent the 90s has been in hindsight ... interesting.
To any and all of the manufacturers, don't take this as a criticism but as light-hearted comment --
Meade did the serious "scientist" looking guy in the black-rimmed glasses, white lab-coat and tie thing -- of course implying these are very serious telescopes. And if you're serious ...
Celestron did the "Leonard Nimoy" thing along a slightly similar thought line but then later on they did the attractive (usually) blonde girl with the shortish skirt/shorts, wind-blown hair beside the 'scope thing. You know what's implied: buy the telescope and you may/might/will get the girl (gender and sexual orientation is both assumed and strongly stereotyped). These ads were not too dissimilar to a lot of car ads of this era.
But more than this, I often used to wonder (still do) at the angle the the Astrophysics Telescopes ads were driving at. Black & White pic, they had the big refractor set up beside a tallish but demure-looking late 40s lady, big glasses, poodle-perm wearing a dress that looked like it was bought at K-Mart, sitting on a chair beside it holding the control -- almost expressionless and looking not a lot unlike Dustin Hoffman in the "Tootsie" film.
Now, I'm sure she was a lovely person, but her presence was no incredibly neutral one has to ask why was she there at all? What does she add -- to the ad? How are they selling this? What's the message? Is there a message at all or is she just the receptionist at Astrophysics?
That ad persisted for a loooong time and I think I saw it the last time only a few years ago.
But more than this, I often used to wonder (still do) at the angle the the Astrophysics Telescopes ads were driving at. Black & White pic, they had the big refractor set up beside a tallish but demure-looking late 40s lady, big glasses, poodle-perm wearing a dress that looked like it was bought at K-Mart, sitting on a chair beside it holding the control -- almost expressionless and looking not a lot unlike Dustin Hoffman in the "Tootsie" film.
Now, I'm sure she was a lovely person, but her presence was no incredibly neutral one has to ask why was she there at all? What does she add -- to the ad? How are they selling this? What's the message? Is there a message at all or is she just the receptionist at Astrophysics?
That ad persisted for a loooong time and I think I saw it the last time only a few years ago.
Has always puzzled me ...
Best,
Les D
Les,
maybe the puzzle was the thing that kept you coming back and looking
at the scope ad.
I recall exactly the ad you mean too
Beautifully described too! Tootsie....LOL
My S&T collection starts at 1978 up to present day....I will just HAVE
to go and grab a few now from the late 70's for a laugh.
....Celestron did the "Leonard Nimoy" thing along a slightly similar thought line but then later on they did the attractive (usually) blonde girl with the shortish skirt/shorts, wind-blown hair beside the 'scope thing. You know what's implied: buy the telescope and you may/might/will get the girl (gender and sexual orientation is both assumed and strongly stereotyped). These ads were not too dissimilar to a lot of car ads of this era.....
Everytime I visit BinTel, they never have those 'scopes on the showroom floor with the blonde leggy models standing next to them??? Mind you the way the dollar has gone recently, I probably can't afford them now anyway .
Yeah you have got to wonder about what the marketing departments were thinking back then. Fast cars and blondes - yes I can see the connection. Fast telescopes and blondes...??
It's great these magazines are a real time capsule into both the hobby and society in general.
Les,
maybe the puzzle was the thing that kept you coming back and looking
at the scope ad.
I recall exactly the ad you mean too
Beautifully described too! Tootsie....LOL
...it's "yep, she looks like the missus but isn't nagging you about buying this telescope ..."
Could you dig up this old ad if you get a chance Les? I vaguely remember it by your description, but It would be great to see it in all it's glory.
Actually, those ads are quite okay to me. She's standing next to a telescope, that's it I guess. But a leggy blonde in a short dress, what's that acheiving, reaaalllly??
Now if you excuse me I must get back to watching Mrs. Doubtfire....
Could you dig up this old ad if you get a chance Les? I vaguely remember it by your description, but It would be great to see it in all it's glory.
Actually, those ads are quite okay to me. She's standing next to a telescope, that's it I guess. But a leggy blonde in a short dress, what's that acheiving, reaaalllly??
The pic I'm talking about (and the one you're wanting -- I think) is on this page:
But here it's in colour. In the magazines it was in B&W -- I'm pretty certain. I said earlier she was wearing glasses but it seems like memory has failed me there.
Still, in your mind's-eye, put a pair of big glasses on her and tell me she doesn't look like a tall "Tootsie" ?
But, as I said, who is this person?
The models in the Celestron ads left no doubt as to why they were there but ... Is she the receptionist at Astro-Physics? The owner? The owner's wife? A well-heeled serious telescope owner just about to head-out to the local Presbyterian service on a Sunday morning? How does she add to the ad? What does her dress say on the subject of "Why I should buy this telescope".
I haven't laid in bed for hours-on-end considering this conundrum (I promise -- really) but it does have me more than a little ... stumped.
You ask "What's the leggy blonde achieving, reaaally?" Do I reaaally need to spell this out for you?
But, it did tend to insult the readership a bit. Were we expected to believe the young models in these Celestron ads had actually looked at, let alone looked through the telescopes they posed beside? But, they weren't uninteresting to look at -- and that's why they were there. You looked at the girl and you couldn't help but see the 'scope beside her.
Having said that, what **really cheezes me off ** (and most amatuers fell the same way) are telescope ads boasting "amazing power -- x800 times magnification ... 4x Barlow lens to make the image even clearer. Frankly, it would be less immoral and more honest if they had pics of naked women (or men as the case may be) adorning the ads, and the pics on the box.
Here's a prediction: I'm waiting for the next generation of depatment-store 'scope ad's and I reckon the emphasis will shift from the "over the top huuuuuuuge magnification come-on", to the "massive 50,000 object database ... you can see the entire Unverse" in the go-to alt-az drive on the ubiquitous 50 and 60mm refractors of a few years time -- if not now. Databases on chips are even cheaper to include that a x4 barlow lens ... Can't wait for the 'massive database' wars -- 30, 40, 50, 90,000 object libraries ...
Going to bed now to (not) re-consider that conundrum I mentioned ... (promise!)
what no web sites 
