Compendium: Critique and Suggestions for 2010

[Enchilada]

In the end, the Compendium looks and sounds like it is really brilliant idea, and many have got a real personal boost from it, and are totally impressed with the whole outcome. Others may not be as passionate.

However, I already know. I didn't buy one, nor likely will I see one in the future. In some ways, it does feel like, as said in the multiple threads on the topic introduced here in the last few days and weeks, some here have just forgotten that others may have slightly different interests and thoughts / concepts towards astronomy.

I don't know what you guys are expecting other IIS'ers to say, especially as they can't view one, but after reading the sentiments being posting here, I do really feel like I'm being somewhat excluded from the overall discussion and the posters to the group - and mostly. just because I did not contribute nor did I purchase a copy.

There is no right or wrong in my argument - but it is just how I feel..

As for Rodstar comments, he is quite entitled to his opinion… but I do partially see his seemingly honest point. As the originator of this thread, rightly or wrongly, I mostly interpret that his input is basically to make any future Compendiums better and far more inclusive and not just necessarily to the core elements of imagers/ photographers contributing alone to the publication. (I might be wrong, though!)

Omaroo has done a brilliant job by the sound of it, and his expertise in the printing game, has obviously contributed greatly to what you have in your hands. However, it may not appeal to everyone, and there will be a range of opinion about it. Some will disagree, but that's human nature, and that's just how it sometimes goes…

As an observer of this particular thread, seriously folks, I wouldn't read anything more into it…

Originally Posted by dugnsuz

This whole negative thread stinks of jealousy.
... but other's posts have taken the debate elsewhere.

As for the quote above, I disagree. IMO it sounds more like some photographic clique flexing its collective muscle… and I too (and probably a few others) just happen not to be a part of that clique. (It's hard to be involved in things when your not - and this is not just exclusive to Ice In Space, mind you.)

Next time, if there is a next time, you might like to consider to appease a much wider audience. But that too, is my own opinion...

[Octane (Humayun)]

Why can't people understand that it was a coffee table book?

It was never intended to be a calendar or information resource.

If you guys want to make things which are pertinent to your interests, go ahead and do it.

It is really quite sad that something so fun, shiny, pretty and just plain cool had to degenerate into this thread. This isn't targeted at you Rod, but, some of the things John said made me scratch my head. John you were off base when you referred to the majority of imagers (let's face it, you did say 12 were outstanding) were quarter-brained, etc. There really isn't any need for such commentary; we can't all be Rob Gendler.

Regards,
Humayun

[stephenb (Stephen)]

Originally Posted by ausastronomer

Well Duncan you're saying it but you're only telling 1/4 of the story. A book about "US" ? But "US" clearly according to the new rules only encompasses imagers ? So it isn't about "US" its now about "some of us"

Fact is I tried to take astro images before most of the people stickin their name in lights in the almanac knew their arse from their elbow, but sadly I couldn't take pictures worth squat and ended up with about 8,000 km worth of Kodak Ektachrome in the garbage can. But sad thing is it was a whole different world back then and to take decent images you needed to know a lot about astronomy and even more about photography. Now the naive can do decent work with simple equipment, a computer, a lot of time and a 1/4 of a brain. Whilst the the highly skilled still stand absolutely head and shoulders above the pupils, the pupils can easily look halfway clever. What should not be forgotten is the fact that this is a community where we all contribute for people to learn and one discipline should not stand above any other.

Cheers,
John B

What a very dissapointing reply from you John. I do not know who you are, but I too used to practice astrophotography, and I took the initiative of using 2009 as a landmark year for me and I actually used 4 film images and one CCD image in the compendium, and Chris never had an issue with that. Perhaps you should have taken that initiative also? Instead of sitting on your grumpy backside like a surly schoolboy who never got invited to play with the rest of the boys

My CCD imaging is pretty poor to say the least, but that makes me no more important than anyone else in this community or anyone else in this COFFEE TABLE BOOK. Nothing more, nothing less. Actually by your standard John, I must only have 1/8 of a brain then. If I never contribute to a compendium again, (which as a visual observer, I may not), I wouldn't mind.

Your post smacks of jealousy and sour grapes.

Please feel free to produce your own compendium, John, with your own images or using "other" disciplines you are vaguely referring to.

JJJ, Chris and all the contributors, novice or otherwise, be comfortable and proud in the fact that you have been a part of something fresh and exciting in your hobby.

[iceman (Mike)]

I'm very disappointed in the direction this thread has taken - unfortunately primarily as a result of the comments of one individual, who didn't contribute to, or buy the book.

John, your comments are offensive to say the least. The book wasn't intended to be a showcase of the BEST photography from the BEST IceInSpace astrophotographers. It was intended to be a coffee table book, with images, showcasing the IceInSpace community and their images. The very good, good, and those just learning.

I don't blame Rod - his opinions were his own opinions. Carefully considered and thought out, and asking for critique/comment. He purposely set out not to offend anyone. His desire was to offer input/suggestions and ask for feedback on how to make the 2010 Compendium even better.

However not everyone put the same thought and consideration into their post. So unfortunately this thread has to be locked because it's only going to degenerate further. I'm sure Chris will have his own thoughts too and there'll be an opportunity for him to post them in the future I'm sure.