Jump to content


Photo

The Cambridge Atlas of Herschel Objects, opinions?

  • Please log in to reply
7 replies to this topic

#1 CounterWeight

CounterWeight

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 8237
  • Joined: 05 Oct 2008
  • Loc: Palo alto, CA.

Posted 08 February 2013 - 12:27 AM

Well the subject line pretty much says it all. If you also own the Omeara and Bratton guides I'd like to know what you think are the differences that would promote it to my 'want' list? the 'atlas' layout is compelling, though there are many ways around the woods with all my other atlas and charting software.

Thanks as always for your time.

.

#2 BobinKy

BobinKy

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3089
  • Joined: 27 Apr 2007

Posted 08 February 2013 - 11:11 AM

I own and use The Cambridge Atlas of Herschel Objects. I think it is the most beautiful of the contemporary atlases. I also like the larger scale and page size (compared to the popular Sky Pocket Atlas). The showpiece list (p. 12-33) and the 2500 object list (p. 106-183) are quite good.

EDIT: The 2500 object list in the appendix of The Cambridge Atlas of Herschel objects is sequenced by NGC number, which is the second column in the table. Thus, if you know the NGC number of an object, you can identify the Herschel number and class, as well as the other columns of data. Finding a specific object in the atlas is pretty simple since the chart number, RA, dec, mag, SB, etc. are some of the data listed in the 2500 object list. Regarding nearby stars to assist object location, the atlas is mag 7.6 and you can consult Uranometria to get you from a bright star to the specific NGC object. The guides listed below also give directions to the objects.

I also have the following Herschel guides.

Bratton, M. (2011). The Complete Guide to the Herschel Objects. Cambridge.

Mullaney, J. (2007). The Herschel Objects and How to Observe Them. Springer.

O'Meara, S. (2007). Herschel 400 Observing Guide. Cambridge.
Of the three titles, O'Meara gives the most detail on the Herschel 400, and the photos and location tips and illustrations are quite good.

However, I find the Bratton descriptions of the 2500 objects to the point and the photos quite nice--although there are not photos for all 2500 Herschel objects. I also like the descriptions of the observing locations chosen by Bratton. I think his guide makes a nice companion to the Cambridge Atlas of Herschel Objects.

Mullaney's guide is a quick approach to the Herschel showpieces, organizing the showpieces by class, and then by constellation within each class. Mullaney's target list in the back matter numbers 615 Herschel objects, but only a portion have descriptions and photos in the body of the text.

Of the three guides, Bratton stands at the top of the heap, in my opinion. However, you really need all three because the descriptions are from different observers and offer their own perspectives of the objects.

#3 LivingNDixie

LivingNDixie

    TSP Chowhound

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 18729
  • Joined: 23 Apr 2003
  • Loc: Trussville, AL

Posted 08 February 2013 - 11:40 AM

I have the O'Meara and Bratton books. Bob pretty much nails it in his post, and I really don't have anything to add. However there is a sticky thread up top that has links to some of the better threads that involve these two titles you mentioned.

#4 Tony Flanders

Tony Flanders

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11301
  • Joined: 18 May 2006
  • Loc: Cambridge, MA, USA

Posted 08 February 2013 - 01:50 PM

The Cambridge Atlas of Herschel Objects is very good in its own way, but quite specialized and limited.

It uses the same plan and star depth as the Cambridge Atlas of Double Stars, a work about which I have no such caveats.

The Herschel atlas does a fine job of showing where Wm. Herschels objects lie, and what their Herschel designations are.

On the other hand, given the size of the Herschel atlas, it obviously doesn't contain anywhere near enough stars to star-hop to all the objects that it shows. The other odd thing is that it labels the objects only with the Herschel designations, not with their "real" names -- namely, the NGC numbers.

#5 Rick Woods

Rick Woods

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 14935
  • Joined: 27 Jan 2005
  • Loc: Inner Solar System

Posted 08 February 2013 - 06:19 PM

The Cambridge Atlas of Herschel Objects is very good in its own way, but quite specialized and limited.

It uses the same plan and star depth as the Cambridge Atlas of Double Stars, a work about which I have no such caveats.

The Herschel atlas does a fine job of showing where Wm. Herschels objects lie, and what their Herschel designations are.

On the other hand, given the size of the Herschel atlas, it obviously doesn't contain anywhere near enough stars to star-hop to all the objects that it shows. The other odd thing is that it labels the objects only with the Herschel designations, not with their "real" names -- namely, the NGC numbers.


Well! That's because, when you use it, you're hunting Herschel objects; the NGC didn't even exist back then. Who cares what the NGC numbers are - this is a new batch of objects! And if you really need to know, there's the index in back.

I agree about the limited application, as opposed to the very useful double star atlas. But they're all fun to have. And the Herschel atlas is the only one of its kind, AFAIK.

#6 CounterWeight

CounterWeight

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 8237
  • Joined: 05 Oct 2008
  • Loc: Palo alto, CA.

Posted 09 February 2013 - 08:14 PM

Thanks so much Preston, Tony, and Rick! Much appreciate your comments and time. Am I correct that by itself, the CAHO benefits by the added charts and granularity of the other Atlas - here I am primarily concerned with scale /resolution - but is good for large scale 'at a glance'?

Again, thanks! :)

#7 Rick Woods

Rick Woods

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 14935
  • Joined: 27 Jan 2005
  • Loc: Inner Solar System

Posted 10 February 2013 - 02:34 AM

Jim,

Yeah; IMO, that's exactly it's strong point.

#8 faackanders2

faackanders2

    Vanguard

  • -----
  • Posts: 2485
  • Joined: 28 Mar 2011

Posted 10 February 2013 - 06:40 PM

I own and use The Cambridge Atlas of Herschel Objects. I think it is the most beautiful of the contemporary atlases. I also like the larger scale and page size (compared to the popular Sky Pocket Atlas). The showpiece list (p. 12-33) and the 2500 object list (p. 106-183) are quite good.

EDIT: The 2500 object list in the appendix of The Cambridge Atlas of Herschel objects is sequenced by NGC number, which is the second column in the table. Thus, if you know the NGC number of an object, you can identify the Herschel number and class, as well as the other columns of data. Finding a specific object in the atlas is pretty simple since the chart number, RA, dec, mag, SB, etc. are some of the data listed in the 2500 object list. Regarding nearby stars to assist object location, the atlas is mag 7.6 and you can consult Uranometria to get you from a bright star to the specific NGC object. The guides listed below also give directions to the objects.

I also have the following Herschel guides.

Bratton, M. (2011). The Complete Guide to the Herschel Objects. Cambridge.

Mullaney, J. (2007). The Herschel Objects and How to Observe Them. Springer.

O'Meara, S. (2007). Herschel 400 Observing Guide. Cambridge.
Of the three titles, O'Meara gives the most detail on the Herschel 400, and the photos and location tips and illustrations are quite good.

However, I find the Bratton descriptions of the 2500 objects to the point and the photos quite nice--although there are not photos for all 2500 Herschel objects. I also like the descriptions of the observing locations chosen by Bratton. I think his guide makes a nice companion to the Cambridge Atlas of Herschel Objects.

Mullaney's guide is a quick approach to the Herschel showpieces, organizing the showpieces by class, and then by constellation within each class. Mullaney's target list in the back matter numbers 615 Herschel objects, but only a portion have descriptions and photos in the body of the text.

Of the three guides, Bratton stands at the top of the heap, in my opinion. However, you really need all three because the descriptions are from different observers and offer their own perspectives of the objects.


I have all of them also. I find O'Meras guides easiest to use, and love his DSO series which covers most of the H400 in detail. I require the hand drawings and photos to confirm the objects, and I like how all of O'Mears stuff has maps so it could be stand alone. O'Meara's H400 book is broken down by months and weeks (and like Pettington's Messier Marathon) it is geared to ordering objects to make you succeed in finding all H400 objects in a year providing you are able to observe from a dark site with large aperture every week (or at least several times every month). I have used O'meara's September chapter at a camping dark sky party with sucess.

Brattons book lacks images/photos but it includes test for all Hershell objects, not just H400. Due to lack of images I have not read much of this book.

I elieve Mullalleys book covers the best of the H400, and I really liked that book and got me interested in attempting the H400.

The Cambridge guide is nice that it plots all the H and h objects. They are all labeled in both NGC and H and h numbers so it makes it very easy to cross reference. I have not seriously attempted to conquer the H400 objects yet, so I actually use sky atlas 2000 (or pocket sky atlas) or my many telrad finder charts more.

Since I do not have go to and use telrads. I have lots of telrad finder charts. I have always wanted to find one that has all the Caldwell Objects, and I found it with Ducheck's laminated "Telrad Finder Chart of the 'best' 300 objects" and I use this often. At the same time I also bought Duchek's laminated "Telrad Finder Chart of the Herschell 400". I cross referenced both to O'Meara's DSO series. Both are broken down by constellation and hence makes it easy to use since you are only looking in a small part of the sky.

Finding all H400 is a major task and requires dark skies (probably darker than I have within an hour from home).






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics