CWAS "David Malin Awards", 2011 submissions now open

[Paul Haese]

Oh grow up. People have different opinions all the time here.

[M_Lewis (Mark)]

Thank you, that's all I needed to hear from you.

[iceman (Mike)]

Guys, chill.

I didn't take Paul's original post as personally attacking. I don't agree with his statements but I can choose to take offence to them or not. I can choose to just ignore them.

Even though it may not have been worded the best, I took Paul's issue as with the paper and the article, not the photographers who took the pictures. If he thinks they're not astrophotography, that's his opinion. I don't agree with him at all but I'm not going to take offence to it even though I take very similar shots all the time.

There's no need to try and defend the astrophotographers, or defend the competition against Paul's comments. The massive number of people entering each year speak for the competition. And David's winning choices speak for the photographers.

[Peter Ward]

...this is sounding rather like the Archibalds....but I can see where Paul is coming from.

Here is the link to my HM shot

Would I classify it as an Astro-image?

I think the answer is no.

I like it alot, it's a unique landscape (seemed to tick two boxes, Australia? Yes. Under the stars? Yes. )

But a picture of just the heavens it is not....plus this years DM open prize had a pretty clear theme.

"Australia under the stars" (the fine print was "Australia under any celestial body" ).

As to whether "Solar system wide angle" or "deep sky" can be permitted to have an interloper in the field....where do you draw the line. Bird? Plane? ISS? Comet?

I suspect the answer is the image needs to have interest...

This is a great shot of the moon.

but,

this lunar shot is better


Just my two cents worth....

[bratislav (Bratislav)]

Just one planet? Sheesh

[hotspur (Chris)]

Just to clear up a bit of confusion that two members appear to be having.(although it more likely appears they are exhibiting signs of SOL).

Here is a 'in situ' image of the gear and equipment used to obtain the Astro image that won the Solar System category.Basically-its a refrator telescope on a EQ mount,with motors to track celestial objects.I fail to see how anyone make the claim-the image is not a astro image.Obviously 2 people here are very upset.

I have seen plenty of other people over the years use very similar equipment to take one frame images of celestial objects and win astro comps-no mention of them not been "proper astro images"

Doubtless,if other members here,had a winning image and some said it was not a proper astro image-the moderation would have been swift.As we all know the moderation here on IIS is done on a lop-side basis-moderation for some,but not others.

[iceman (Mike)]

Originally Posted by hotspur

Doubtless,if other members here,had a winning image and some said it was not a proper astro image-the moderation would have been swift.As we all know the moderation here on IIS is done on a lop-side basis-moderation for some,but not others.

You know, this is just not true - no matter how many times you or anyone else says it.

Just because someone has an opinion that it's "not an astro image", how does that deserve moderation? Why should that post be deleted? Under what rules? Because 1 or 2 people got offended by it?

This is not a nanny forum. We're all adults here. I take exactly the same type of images as the Moon/plane one that won, and I have won competitions with those images as well. I did not get offended by his assertion that "It's not an astro image".

Because I know it is. And you know it is. So who cares what one person thinks? If you think it's sour grapes, then call it sour grapes and move on. Or just shrug it off and move on.

But i'm certainly not going to delete the posts. Just as we didn't delete Leon's posts that said the overall winning image wasn't all that great. It's one person's opinion.

It would not have mattered who made the claim - the moderation would be the same.

[Peter Ward]

Originally Posted by bratislav

Just one planet? Sheesh

Nice. Colour too. But you missed my point.... The image is interesting.

Unless the lunar limb looked like it was taken from lunar orbit, it would have bee a run-of-the-mill moon shot: there are thousands of examples out there.

Put a planet or UFO next to it....and the image has interest!

[bratislav (Bratislav)]

No point argued. Just an image.
Moon and Mars were only 17 degrees above horizon when session started, less than 12 at the end. No 'lunar orbit' shots were possible with that, but we can't control these events. I don't think I'll see another grazing occultation like that in my lifetime.