More B&W globs

[strongmanmike (Michael)]

Originally Posted by Peter Ward

Thanks Marcus! ...Quite possibly the FFC position needs refinement....I just love how my images get put under the microscope

Yeh... know how you feel Fred likes to use an electron microscope and a micrometer

[AlexN]

There there big fellas.. Try being colour blind and tell me how you like people telling you whats what

[sjastro]

I don't understand why images should get the "electron microscope treatment".

When I used to post on the SBIG forum some of the US imagers had the irratating habit of performing autopsies on my images revealing every subtle defect that would not be observed under ordinary conditions.

What's the point of it?

Steven

[Octane (Humayun)]

To make their e-peen bigger than yours, Steven.

H

[AlexN]

Generally - I'd say its a case of "your gear is better than mine... Bet I can find faults in it though!" However in other cases it is "We all know you can do better... What happened?"

Some times I'm sure its just to get up the persons nose...

I think it can be constructive at times.. It may be such a subtle defect that you yourself don't notice it until someone points it out.. and whilst at face value, that is annoying, once that tiny defect is sorted out, be it via processing or slight hardware changes, isn't it then satisfying to know that the problem is gone??

If you have to zoom to 400% to notice problems, the problem does not need to be worried about. If it can be clearly seen at 100% then you should endeavor to fix it when time/money allows... Thats my policy on it anyway...

[sjastro]

Without naming names, one of the astroimagers has produced world class monochrome images but considers most image processing as fraudulent which destroys the ethics of astroimaging.

Looking for faults in an image rather than the image itself seems to be the major objective with some people.

Steven

[Octane (Humayun)]

Steven, you should see some "photography" forums -- full of gearheads who can rattle off every last minute detail on a piece of equipment used to take a posted image, but, wouldn't know how to take an image, or, know a good one if it upped and bit them on the ass.

H

[AlexN]

Humi, Brisbane photography forums are 99% as you just described. for this reason, I am a VERY silent member of those forums... I used to post images there... Now, every time I post it turns into a canon vs nikon argument, or whether I should have paid the extra money for the 600 L over the 500 L etc.. Sometimes you have to step back and just say "who cares" when it comes to stuff like that...

[Peter Ward]

There, there guys....I'll be the first to admit the image is not perfect ...but it's not too shabby either (IMHO) given the size of a KAF16803 sensor.

Frankly, most systems would fail miserably in off axis performance and mounting such a large CCD assembly...to be sure, these systems are not for the casual imager.

Would a RCOS 82mm field corrector make a difference? I doubt it (gosh...I sound like Kevin '07)

The KAF16803 sensor has "only" a 54 mm diagonal....ie 4mm larger than standard 2" systems. Yet it is easily covered by the 70mm back-end of the RCOS system I currently use.....and given it would require $US6,000 worth of new back-end gear to go to 82mm....nah....a little tweaking in FFC spacing, and polar alignment seems like a better option until proved otherwise