Jump to content


Photo

Andy's Shot Glass Video - Wish He Would Correct It

  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
95 replies to this topic

#76 astro_baby

astro_baby

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 998
  • Joined: 17 Jun 2008
  • Loc: United Kingdom

Posted 09 February 2013 - 05:29 PM

Thanks Jason and hi to you too and hope you are well.

The lack of concentricity totally messed up my head. More so because I was used to old fashioned slow scopes collimated with a glorified film cannister. My reflector circa 1977 had a colimation tube supplied with the scope. I cant recall its exact F ratio but it would have been about F8.

I just found the inability to get the circles concentric AND centred under the focuser was a real brain ache. Not being an optical expert I just clildnt understand why it was impossible. I cant be the only one as I see this come up on forums so often.

I have to be honest, unlike you Jason I just dont respond to collimation threads these days because it does my head in and its so hard to diagnose what a users peoblem may be from screenshots.
I know that sounds like I am being a bit of a cow but i found all my time was being absorbed answering collimation issues.

The other reason is I am not that expert, i can collimate my scope and most other scopes in my hands but I lack the theoretical knowledge to handle much else.

With regards go Andys tutorial it was one of the things that baffled me but it did at least get me to a kind of first base so it dis have its uses. Pesonally I think lasers in the hands of a novice cause more problems than they ever solve not least because most scopes dont have an accurate enough focuser to make a laser useful.
 

#77 droid

droid

    rocketman

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 7208
  • Joined: 29 Aug 2004
  • Loc: Conneaut, Ohio

Posted 09 February 2013 - 07:38 PM

My dear old dad alwasy said if you want something done right ,do it your self.

Sounds like a plan ,who wants to do it???

Its easy just make a video and post it on the net.....
 

#78 jmartin

jmartin

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 113
  • Joined: 24 Aug 2008
  • Loc: Corpus Christi, TX

Posted 09 February 2013 - 08:54 PM

Worrying about the concentric rings is where collimation anxiety comes from (oh my god, it's not 1000000000% correct). Enjoy your scope and forget about it. Or make your own video simple as that. I used Andy's video and it worked great for me.
 

#79 FirstSight

FirstSight

    Duke of Deneb

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 9977
  • Joined: 26 Dec 2005
  • Loc: Raleigh, NC

Posted 10 February 2013 - 12:14 AM

My dear old dad alwasy said if you want something done right ,do it your self.

Sounds like a plan ,who wants to do it???

Its easy just make a video and post it on the net.....


I said that back many posts ago in this thread, at least twice. That's Andy's privilige to decline to accept the constructive criticism that's been well-articulated on this thread, and keep his video the way he wants. And it is up to those of us offering the constructive criticism to eventually come up with an alternative (there, that's at least three times). The major hurdle in doing so isn't so much understanding how to present accurate material in a manner suitably clear and straightforward for beginners; rather the challenging part is creating material with high-quality production values, graphics, and animations. I'll grant Andy that his video has superb production values and graphics, is stylistically well-presented, and shows that he put a lot of effort into it, regardless of the issues many of us have about certain substantive particulars.
 

#80 Jason D

Jason D

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 6668
  • Joined: 21 Oct 2006
  • Loc: California

Posted 10 February 2013 - 02:39 AM

Worrying about the concentric rings is where collimation anxiety comes from (oh my god, it's not 1000000000% correct). Enjoy your scope and forget about it. Or make your own video simple as that. I used Andy's video and it worked great for me.


Good advice but how do you suggest passing it to beginners? Beginners do not know which alignments are critical and which ones are not. Beginners do not understand why their collimation cap view is non-concentric and if they should ignore it or not. Passing the correct knowledge to them and help them avoid getting frustrated is the point of this thread.

If Andy's video is in some obscure website then this thread would not have existed. Because Andy's video is popular and google directs beginners to it, it would be a good place to pass on these collimation related messages.

Jason
 

#81 apage

apage

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 67
  • Joined: 13 Dec 2003
  • Loc: Chesterville, Maine

Posted 10 February 2013 - 03:40 AM

:waytogo:
 

#82 cheapersleeper

cheapersleeper

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3380
  • Joined: 22 Jan 2010
  • Loc: Sachse TX

Posted 10 February 2013 - 05:56 AM

Searched "how to collimate a Newtonian telescope" and got 24,000 hits for videos, and 1,280,000 hits total. At no point in that search did Andy's vid pop onto my screen and slap me around until I watched it, or threatened my family if I didn't. There is no problem here beyond the offended sensibilities of the pedantic.

Over the few years I have been on this site, I have seen plenty of bewildered, ready to throw scopes out the winodow beginners, and they were not watching the video in question. They were reading the hundreds of pages of arguments here regarding collimation along with constant suggestion that they immediately acquire 400 bucks of collimation tools to be able to enjoy their Craigslist telescopes.

This hand ringing is not about the poor beginners, it's about being RIGHT.

Calm down, people.

Regards,
 

#83 Bob S.

Bob S.

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1883
  • Joined: 14 Jul 2005

Posted 10 February 2013 - 06:36 AM

+1 for Cheapersleeper's comments. My collimation cap works perfectly for my f/3 scope (just kidding). However, we do tend to get rather a..l (orofice body part) about collimation and it becomes very confusing for beginners. I cringe when I hear a beginner expousing complex collimation terms that only confuse their appreciation/understanding of basic Newtonian collimation. Rick Singmaster of Starmaster Telescopes has pointed out to me on numerous occassions that a relatively poorly collimated scope as seen in an autocollimator still shows fairly decent images.

I remember teaching one of our clan how to do collimation using hand puppet illustrations of scope component movements to take it out of the realm of the complex with all of the jargon. This person rapidly moved on to become quite expert at collimation with his 18" f/4.3 scope and I am sure can now easily connect the dots between the esoteric and the practical.
 

#84 Jason D

Jason D

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 6668
  • Joined: 21 Oct 2006
  • Loc: California

Posted 10 February 2013 - 10:20 AM

Calm down, people.


Good advice that applies to all of us including you.

Despite the intended message of this thread has been re-iterated many times, this thread keeps getting derailed.

This thread has never been about collimation tools or about how to collimate or about how much to collimate. It is about editing or adding an addendum to make Andy’s popular collimation video even better.

Maybe it is time to lock this thread. :lock2:

Jason
 

#85 FirstSight

FirstSight

    Duke of Deneb

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 9977
  • Joined: 26 Dec 2005
  • Loc: Raleigh, NC

Posted 10 February 2013 - 11:17 AM

Calm down, people.


Despite the intended message of this thread has been re-iterated many times, this thread keeps getting derailed.

This thread has never been about collimation tools or about how to collimate or about how much to collimate. It is about editing or adding an addendum to make Andy’s popular collimation video even better.

Maybe it is time to lock this thread. :lock2:

Jason


I agree that we've reached a point where all relevant, substantive discussion-points have been made and critiqued. Although the faction who maintain that the errors in Andy's video are nonexistent or at least harmless are simply wrong IMHO, they have nonetheless correctly laid down a valid challenge: SO SHOW US by coming up with something better, something that is at the same time a correctly accurate, yet easily understandable collimation tutorial, which BTW has quality graphic and production values.

The first step toward something like that might be to take a separate thread to work on a rough script or storyboard for such a potential presentation, before (and without at all) committing anyone toward proceeding further into the nitty-gritty of quality graphics or production work. Even if we never advanced such a project into any real production stages, the chance to get a concrete proposal thoroughly critiqued by the CN membership would still be a valuable exercise. A clear, simple, concise instructional tutorial is anything but that to create. Rambling on in complex jargon is easy. Explaining things accurately, yet clearly in a way that strips off obfuscating jargon is much more difficult, yet doable with thoughtful effort.
 

#86 jmartin

jmartin

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 113
  • Joined: 24 Aug 2008
  • Loc: Corpus Christi, TX

Posted 10 February 2013 - 11:22 AM

I was about as much a beginner as I could be when I first used the video, then as time went on I got better with what I was doing. As will most new astronomers. It is a good basic reference point for what will work for most people.
 

#87 FirstSight

FirstSight

    Duke of Deneb

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 9977
  • Joined: 26 Dec 2005
  • Loc: Raleigh, NC

Posted 10 February 2013 - 11:44 AM

I was about as much a beginner as I could be when I first used the video, then as time went on I got better with what I was doing. As will most new astronomers. It is a good basic reference point for what will work for most people.


There's lots of us, me included, who saw Andy's video at relatively early points in our experience with reflectors, who thought at the time it was helpfully good, and yet managed to successfully evolve out understanding past its limitations. The problem is that the particular inaccuracies contained therein are totally unnecessary sacrifices for serving the interests of a clear, basic, correct presentation for neophytes. This isn't a case like learning downhill skiing, where teaching snowplow and stem turns are often necessary inferior compromises in technique before someone is ready to learn parallel.

However, IMHO we're past the point where the anecdotal evidence presented by one side vs the other are going to change anyone's mind.
 

#88 howard929

howard929

    Member

  • *****
  • Posts: 3741
  • Joined: 02 Jan 2011
  • Loc: Low End of High Ground

Posted 10 February 2013 - 12:14 PM

Chris,

If you're going to do it or if anyone else here does it. All I'd suggest is Make it simple. Make it concise. Leave out all the "I need a grounding in optics, 2 dictionaries and 3 spell checkers" just to make sense of it. Compete with Andy, and make it easy for beginners to understand and to do. ie: Leave out those overly complicated optical path drawings. Include: if you see that, turn this screw this way and watch it correct itself. Make it so that the message isn't how smart you are but how easy it is to do.

Howard
 

#89 FirstSight

FirstSight

    Duke of Deneb

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 9977
  • Joined: 26 Dec 2005
  • Loc: Raleigh, NC

Posted 10 February 2013 - 12:23 PM

Chris,

If you're going to do it or if anyone else here does it. All I'd suggest is Make it simple. Make it concise. Leave out all the "I need a grounding in optics, 2 dictionaries and 3 spell checkers" just to make sense of it. Compete with Andy, and make it easy for beginners to understand and to do. ie: Leave out those overly complicated optical path drawings. Include: if you see that, turn this screw this way and watch it correct itself. Make it so that the message isn't how smart you are but how easy it is to do.

Howard


I'm in complete agreement here. Despite having gained a progressively more sophisticated understanding of collimation, I'm not (yet) any sort of advanced expert myself, and still find myself stumbling through the loose scree of jargon as I work myself gradually toward the mountain-top (if a top to this mountain even exists; it does, so I'm told, but I haven't seen it yet myself). However, OTOH one of the best ways to master a subject is to learn it well enough to teach it to someone else, which process also has the sharp-pointed edge of often ruthlessly exposing the remaining holes in one's own understanding.
 

#90 jgraham

jgraham

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 13908
  • Joined: 02 Dec 2004
  • Loc: Miami Valley Astronomical Society

Posted 10 February 2013 - 12:28 PM

I'm looking forward to your instructional video.
 

#91 howard929

howard929

    Member

  • *****
  • Posts: 3741
  • Joined: 02 Jan 2011
  • Loc: Low End of High Ground

Posted 10 February 2013 - 12:38 PM

However, OTOH one of the best ways to master a subject is to learn it well enough to teach it to someone else,


IME in this world there's no connection there. Knowing certifies but doesn't necessarily equate to the actual ability to teach.
 

#92 FirstSight

FirstSight

    Duke of Deneb

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 9977
  • Joined: 26 Dec 2005
  • Loc: Raleigh, NC

Posted 10 February 2013 - 12:40 PM

I'm looking forward to your instructional video.


A little premature to promise anything concrete will yet come of this. One of the things I greatly respect about Andy's video is how obviously much necessary work and time he obviously put into it to make it a quality production rather than just another guy-with-webcam-and-scope humdrum youtube video, the latter of which could be done this afternoon without making any really useful advance in what's already available.
 

#93 howard929

howard929

    Member

  • *****
  • Posts: 3741
  • Joined: 02 Jan 2011
  • Loc: Low End of High Ground

Posted 10 February 2013 - 12:48 PM

BTW - wish to see a good teacher teach? Hang around the Beginners forum and see if Jon Isaacs doesn't personify what it means to be a teacher.
 

#94 Jason D

Jason D

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 6668
  • Joined: 21 Oct 2006
  • Loc: California

Posted 10 February 2013 - 01:15 PM

One of the things I greatly respect about Andy's video is how obviously much necessary work and time he obviously put into it to make it a quality production rather than just another guy-with-webcam-and-scope humdrum youtube


Andy's profession is an online course developer. It is his expertise as evident by his collimation video in terms of animation and narration.

Jason
 

#95 astro_baby

astro_baby

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 998
  • Joined: 17 Jun 2008
  • Loc: United Kingdom

Posted 10 February 2013 - 03:15 PM

Purely personal thing, i dont really like video tutorials, i fond them tough to concentrate on and while I am thinking the video has moved on. I prefer written instructions with pic and diagrams which is what I tend to create.

One of my jobs was training sales staff years ago so I have some training experience.

As already said I would always encourage people to have a go themselves. You might lean something in the process as much as anything.

I have refrained from posting a link to my guide lest it be seen as self promotion but I am always up for learned criticism of the guide.
 

#96 Jarad

Jarad

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 6389
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2003
  • Loc: Atlanta, GA

Posted 10 February 2013 - 04:44 PM

Okay, I agree that the substantive points have been made, and we're going in circles now. Time to put this one to bed.

Thanks,

Jarad
 






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics