Image Entries for CWAS

[Alchemy (Clive)]

did any of the previous posters in this thread actually submit an image?

and if so what catagory and what was the image of .... be bold and post a small image 200kb of what you entered.

i will come back for a look .... i am still of the opinion that most have not nor will enter for much the same reasons.
there are 11 posters on this thread, so far the poll indicates more would enter than not, so where are the entries from joe average


..... that should stir the pot a bit

[Outbackmanyep]

Originally Posted by Alchemy

did any of the previous posters in this thread actually submit an image?

and if so what catagory and what was the image of .... be bold and post a small image 200kb of what you entered.

i will come back for a look .... i am still of the opinion that most have not nor will enter for much the same reasons.
there are 11 posters on this thread, so far the poll indicates more would enter than not, so where are the entries from joe average


..... that should stir the pot a bit

I haven't put in an image this year, last year was my first entry, and this year i have been photographing comets which are quite uninteresting to most. I have been making my astronomy science contributions more-so this time around with comet obs. I will certainly enter one next year!!!!!

I know this is me talking hypocrisy, but my involvment in astronomy has taken a bit of a different turn after what i learnt at NACAA

Good luck to all those who DID enter the competition!

[sjastro]

Originally Posted by Bassnut

Steven

Dont agree there, processing is a critical part of the Astrophotograhy experience, if only to counter technical difficulties (darks, flats, stretching etc), but then again I think I see you agree with that much.

Im only talkng about other processing required to enter a comp (if you feel so inclined), in which case you do (or not) whats required to get noticed. Its got nothing to do with art or science, just the comp. If you feel your style of image presentation is not suitable, for that comp, then sure, you wouldnt be interested in entering, although for example David Malin, in his video, states he dislikes overprocessing, and looks for a natural effect.

Fred,

That's another reason why I don't enter. If it has nothing top do with art or science then what is it and what is the criteria for evaluating images?

Regards

Steven

[Outbackmanyep]

Originally Posted by Bassnut

LOL thanks, I know why (ive been told), overprocessing, DM esppecially doesnt like that. I tend to go for "WOW, but-dont-zoom-in arty-farty effect" and NB is certainly not to everyones taste, even many of the top shelf guys here dont like it much. Ive chucked a hissy and not entered lately, but ill learn, eventually, ill keep trying .

In a way it feels quite disheartening when someone tells you that, although i think if you want to get better and more refined then you have to learn with those that have won awards, i bet that if you keep trying to refine your images then you should reach that pinnacle soon.

[jase (Jason)]

I tend to disagree that you need focal length to make an impact. Three of my images were taken with a wide field instruments (FSQ-530mm and TOA150-1050mm). The only deep space photo was NGC1365 taken at ~2800mm. It’s not about the equipment but the creativity you put behind the image. I’ve said this before on other posts – anyone can take a photo, but to take a good one with a lasting impression is the difficultly. If you can capture the imagination of the viewer, you’ve hit the mark. I don’t think any of my images presented perform the latter, but I try.

Wide field work provides spacial distance which is meaningful to many and can be easier to associate with visually. Its always a visual feast to frame a few targets in the single FoV or a small mosaic. Equally, deep space work can offer an alternate perspective on a common target. Fred’s recent deep space M8 post I often go back to a have another look. It was only a Ha image, but I found it mesmerising. When you map the area using the line tool in Maxim, you can start to really visualise the 3D effect of the stellar nursery. Taken with mediocre gear, just bucket loads of data and careful processing.

All forms of imaging has its merits and most images have a story behind them that make it special for the astrophotographer. This shouldn't be overlooked - this first person you are trying to please when taking photos is yourself. If the driving force is someone else, forget about it. Astrophotographers need to think outside the square. Think about the composition; add data from different focal lengths; go deep; produce a mosaic, blend in NB to true colour, there are endless variations. If you want to hit the mark, you need to do better than simply point the telescope to the sky and open the shutter. Think before you shoot.

You're kidding yourself if all you are focused on is equipment capabilities. In this game, you quickly realise that image processing is king. Sure, if you have a shotty mount that doesn't track or guide very well because you've got an oversized OTA on it, then you're off to a bad start. Helps to have a baseline and expectation to work toward.

The goal of image processing is to bring out the best in the data you’ve acquired. There is nothing scientific about it considering you’re modifying pixel values in the quest for beauty – which is the absolute opposite of real scientific data such as astrometry or photometry where you are trying to keep the original data values (hence the screen stretch function that doesn’t modify pixel values, just alters the image screen buffer). You can of course produce pretty pictures that look natural and unprocessed. That is an art in itself, as it’s always easier to work the data over too much. We’ve all been there. It’s key to find a balance. Does NB count as scientific? Hmmm. I will agree with Fred that I don’t feel NB is given much credit in comps compared to true colour imaging. Perhaps that’s simply a perception thing. The two are different when it comes to processing and provide interesting challenges.

While imaging is a solo pursuit, don't be scared to collaborate with others on an imaging project. You only have to see some of the work Martin Pugh and Rob Gendler have done together. Sure, we are talking about two guys with access to high end gear, but you don't have follow the footsteps of these two. Nothing stopping you from doing collaborative work on a smaller scale. Layer some data from a friends long FL SCT over a wide field image for example. You'll be surprised what you'll learn and build confidence in processing data of different types. There is nothing wrong with entering work into the comp which is a collaborative effort.

This is the first time I’ve entered. I'll be honest; my work simply hasn’t been to the standard I’ve been comfortable with previous years. It has improved, but I know I’m capable of pushing the envelope further given more imaging time under my belt. I have no expectations being the first year, so I know I won’t be disappointed regardless of what happens. There are some great Australian imagers on this forum that have what it takes to continually deliver quality astro images. If you don't push yourself and test the waters, you'll never know your limits.

[renormalised (Carl)]

As with any imaging (or anything else), it's a matter of learning from those that are better than yourself and, more importantly, taking further steps on your own by experimentation. You might never win a prize in an astrophoto contest, but that's not why you should be going into something like this. You'll forever be disappointed because it'll never be good enough. What's more important is that you learn from your experience.... learn better techniques, better presentations etc etc. If that means that next time you do win a prize, great. If not, then no sweat. Just do it because you like doing it and if you're satisfied by what you see, then that's all that counts.

[Alchemy (Clive)]

Originally Posted by jase

This is the first time I’ve entered. I'll be honest; my work simply hasn’t been to the standard I’ve been comfortable with previous years.

cut the quote down to highlight what is probably how most feel

as for long focal length being everything.... not quite the intent of my post.... more to the fact that against others of a similar focal length, my images arent of a standard i feel would be appropriate for such a comp..... perhaps in due course that may change.



Jase i read the entire post and see merit in what was said.

renormalised.... i can get the feedback and experience here ... and put up images for that purpose,
before i would enter the CWAS my images will need to improve.

clive.

[strongmanmike (Michael)]

Steve, you have some great astro gear and clearly love imaging and you post your work all over the world for peope to see so why not put it in a competition where even if it doesn't win or rate an honorable mention then it may well still form part of a travelling exhibition that will be seen by over 100 000 people Australia wide for the following 12 months? No harm in that.

The form of the David Malin awards is fantastic for astronomy and astroimaging in my opinion as it provides several categories to cater for a diverse take on our passtime and another stage to have your work seen by lots of people who will appreciate the spectacle, why just stick to web forums and hopeful submissions to astro mags?

The notion that there is somehow something wrong with people entering images in a competition is ludicrous in my opinion. We compete in many things why should astroimaging be any different? The only issue with the DM awards is that it is only one judge and no matter his obvious authority on the subject his eyes are just that, his and when all things have been considered, two similarly technically well done images may ultimately be seperated by a single individuals taste only. However, as I said, many images will be recognised and for various reasons so the chance that your work may be favourably critiqued by David Malin is worth throwing your hat in the ring for in my opinion.

If Luciano Pavarotti had found even one nice quality in my operatic voice and told me I would have been mighty proud (rest his great big fat booming voice soul in peace), so too if David sees even some merit in any one of my entries I will be very proud too but if he doesn't I wont have lost anything but the cost of the entries (paper, ink and entry fee) and my entries may still make it in the travelling exhibition...but that's just me

Mike

[Screwdriverone (Chris)]

I certainly would.

My afocal images are not all that special, but for what I have, I think they arent too bad.

I am soon to receive a modded Philips SPC900NC and with that and a 5 inch reflector, I am going to have as much fun as I can taking photos of things and seeing how they turn out. If I get some results that I am happy with, I would definitely enter them simply because of the thrill of being able to do so.

I am excited that I can probably achieve results as an amateur astronomer that while they may not rock the world, are pretty cool to get in the grand scheme of things.

Granted, the high tech (and high cost) images of I see DSO's and such are pretty impressive, but I get more of a buzz out of innovation and skill with modest equipment than by making the process clinical and boring and killing all the fun of it.

It might change, it might not, but for now, thats what I get my kicks from.

Thanks for listening.

Chris

[sjastro]

Thanks for your comments Mike.

First of all I'd like to set the record straight. I'm not advocating reasons why people shouldn't enter CWAS, I'm giving an account why I'm not entering the competition (or why I don't submit images to astronomy magazines for that matter).

You may have noticed that most of the stuff I publish (the last couple of images being the exception) are of objects off the beaten track. My objective is to give people an opportunity for viewing objects that are either beyond their geographical range or as an imaging alternative to the dozen or so common objects.

It's for this reason I put much more emphasis on the raw data quality than processing. I believe anyone interested in seeing my images deserves a faithful reproduction of the object through a telescope of modest aperture. As I mentioned in a previous post I'm not interested in producing wow images that look as if they were taken with a 4 metre telescope.

As CWAS implies, it is a competition. To be competitive I'd have to go against my instincts and put more emphasis on processing with mega long exposures to produce an aesthetically pleasing image. How much reality gets thrown out in the process is the question.

Don't get me wrong I have great admiration for astroimagers that are prepared to invest long hours in exposure times and processing using the best equipment available. And good luck to anyone entering the competition.

Regards

Steven

[Alchemy (Clive)]

Originally Posted by Alchemy

so far the poll indicates more would enter than not, so where are the entries from joe average


..... that should stir the pot a bit

looks like more stirring is needed....... i see the poll suggests more would than would not, Jase has entered, so has mike it seems...... that was expected.

Given the evidence i dont believe the poll is an accurate representation of the population here. So where are the entries from joe average.

[iceman (Mike)]

I think most of the arguments have been covered so there's probably not too much more I can add. I think the poll just reflects the opinions of those who feel strongly about it either way. Most people probably just don't care. Maybe there should've been an option for that

I like entering competitions. Not for glory, though winning is nice. I like the challenge of pushing yourself to do something different. These days, it's unlikely a typical shot of *something* is going to win or get noticed. It has to be great. It has to be different, unique. Something about the composition, the field of view, etc.

I use it to push myself to get the best images I can and present them in the best way I can. Whether that's mosaics, interesting compositions, etc.

Obviously you need to fit within your target area as well. I'm not going to enter my deep-space images up against the likes of Jase, Mike Sidonio, Peter Ward, Martin Pugh etc. But in the Solar System and Widefield categories is where my expertise, and my equipment, allows me to hopefully capture something worth entering - and where I don't need tens of thousands of dollars worth of equipment and 40 hours of data under dark skies to get the best image in that category.

[Screwdriverone (Chris)]

Well said Mike,

Certainly the Astro's showed your excellent work, especially the 1st and 2nd place in the Solar System categories, with my favourite being the Clavius crater photo, astonishing clarity and framing for that shot.

Well done!

Chris

[Outbackmanyep]

Hi Mike!
May i add to your comment that your images are also being used in studying cloud events on Jupiter and Saturn. This is a great thing to be able to do, not only spew out incredible images but also have a scientific angle as well!
Don't discount the fact that your widefield image or planetary image may come to good use when there is a possible nova or planetary event that may need investigating.
So you may not win an award but your image may one day be turned out in published papers for the advancement of astronomy science!

Always pays to be on the alert!!!!!

[tornado33]

If there was a competition with a specific DSLR category Id be interested in submitting something.
The other problem for me is that I like imaging things that have rarely, if ever been seen in colour. eg the only time I saw the three Menzel planetaries in colour was when I imaged them, but "faint fuzzies" and obscure objects dont score well in photography comps.

Nevertheless astrophotography comps show how amateurs are catching up to the professionals, big observatories dont do much imaging now days, its mostly spectroscopy and photometry (HST excepted of course)
Scott

[Ric]

I have been following this thread with a great deal of interest and a thought came to mind, maybe the time is right for a larger competition with more specific categories. There could be several sections for webcam, DSLR and CCD as well as amateur and semi professional. Within those sections there could be widefield, planetary and deep sky.

It would be a large undertaking for any club or institution but there would be no excuse for anyone not to enter and have a go.

In the meantime I will enter the CWAS competition in the next year or two when my skills have suitably developed.

Cheers

[tornado33]

Will the winning enteries be published in the next AS&T magazine, or Sky & Space Mag?
Scott

[iceman (Mike)]

Last year they were printed in AS&T. I'm guessing it will be the same again this time around.

[jjjnettie (Jeanette)]

Originally Posted by Ric

There could be several sections for webcam, DSLR and CCD as well as amateur and semi professional. Within those sections there could be widefield, planetary and deep sky.

I was discussing this very point with local amateur Chris Thomas the other day.
With regular photo comps, there are Open sections and Novice sections. IF you have won as a Novice, you may only enter in the Open section, but a Novice may enter in both Open and Novice.
The larger the competition, the more sections should be available. But on the other hand, small comps, such as QLD Astrofest, their aren't enough entries to divide it according to the type of camera used and fill each section.
( But if they split the comp into Solar System and DSO that would be fantastically good, hint hint )
Myself, I enter the QLD Astrofest astro photo comp every year. Not with any intention of winning, though that would be nice.
But I truly believe that it isn't a competition without lots of entries. The more entries, the better. Fill that wall, and give the punters something to look at.

[Ric]

That's a valid point and a good idea Jeanette.

I also believe that if you want more people to enter then they have to feel that their entry has a chance of winning hence more categories and levels of entry novice, amateur, semi professional etc.

I don't think it matters whether or not you are professional or amateur everyone still like to think they have a chance, that's just human nature.

Cheers