Click here if you are having trouble logging into the forums
Privacy Policy |
Please read our Terms
of Service | Signup and
Troubleshooting FAQ | Problems? PM a Red or a Green Gu.... uh, User
Starman1
Vendor - Scope City
Reged: 06/24/03
Posts: 10954
Loc: Los Angeles
|
|
Think about the laundry list of things that can influence the quality of what we see:
--the atmosphereic turbulence
--the atmospheric transparency
--viewing location (geography and light pollution)
--the size of the telescope
--the quality of the mirrors
--the collimation of the mirrors
--the size of the spider/secondary
--tube currents
--mirror boundary layers
--dirt on the optics
--the quality of the coatings
--reflections in the eyepieces
--vignetting due to wrong sizes of optical chain pieces
--light scatter in the tube
--eyepiece aberrations (including scatter and poor polish)
--mis-focusing
--holding the eye in the wrong place
--using the wrong eye (one with worst vision)or poor glasses
--cataracts/floaters/retinal problems
--retinal insensitivity doe to poor dark adaptation
--variations in retinal sensitivity due to genetics
--lack of skill in seeing low-contrast/small size objects
--perceptual bias and how it influences what we see
It's a wonder we can see anything well.
The good thing about Cloudy Nights is that we have hundreds of posts helping us mitigate each and every one of the above list of issues. I regard each and every item in the list worthy of comments from anyone who has tackled the issue.
--------------------
Don Pensack
12.5" Truss Dob, 5" Maksutov
Sustaining Lifetime IDA member, TeleVue junkie
|
desertstars
Deja moo
Reged: 11/05/03
Posts: 30012
Loc: Tucson, AZ
|
|
--the atmosphereic turbulence
I deal with this by watching the weather, using online and television sources. I also practice patience at the eyepiece, which is certainly the best strategy. When conditions are iffy I lock the drive in and watch the view for a time, and sooner or later I'm rewarded with one of those moments of clarity that occur on all but the worst nights.
--the atmospheric transparency
Another weather-watcher issue. I use the CSC to get some idea of what I'll be dealing with, and plan accordingly. On nights of poor transparency, I'm more likely to observe planets (or the Moon) than DSOs.
--viewing location (geography and light pollution)
To make the best of my backyard site, I make a plan ahead of time that steers me clear of objects that are too faint for me to find and observe.
--the size of the telescope & the quality of the mirrors
Bought the biggest and best I could with the money I could spare for a hobby.
--the collimation of the mirrors
I started out having them collimated by a pro, while watching and jotting a few notes. Since then all I've had to do is perform some minor adjustments using the collimation cap that came with the scope.
--the size of the spider/secondary
This issue has not presented itself as a problem so far.
--tube currents
--mirror boundary layers
So far, I've dealt with these mostly by allowing plenty of time for the scope to cool down.
--dirt on the optics
Preventative measures so far (keeping the tube capped when not in use, eyepieces in their containers and otherwise covered while not in use during an observing session, an elastic shower cap around the mirror cell end when not in use.
--the quality of the coatings
--reflections in the eyepieces
I haven't noticed any issues regarding these matters, so far.
--vignetting due to wrong sizes of optical chain pieces
Haven't experienced this problem, yet, either.
--light scatter in the tube
While I can see room for improvement, I have not yet felt strongly motivated to take any corrective measures. The first thinh I'm likely to do is construct a light shield extending from the open end of the tube. I'll think about flocking after I do this and see what affect it has.
--eyepiece aberrations (including scatter and poor polish)
Not a problem so far.
--mis-focusing
Practice, and getting to know what it takes to tweak the stock foucser of the 'newt.
--holding the eye in the wrong place
Spending as much time observing as possible, so getting into the right position comes naturally to me.
--using the wrong eye (one with worst vision)or poor glasses
I switch back and forth between eyes to avoid eyestrain, and I do not observe with my glasses on.
--cataracts/floaters/retinal problems
I have floaters, but they are evident only when viewing the Moon. All I've been able to do so far is ignore them.
--retinal insensitivity due to poor dark adaptation
Never experienced this. (Never even heard of it until now.)
--variations in retinal sensitivity due to genetics
None that I'm aware of.
--lack of skill in seeing low-contrast/small size objects
Practice, practice, practice... With a little homework before-hand.
--perceptual bias and how it influences what we see
This is arguably the toughest nut in the basket, since most of the others have some sort of hands-on fix possible. I study pictures of objects when I plan an observing session, preferably low detail B&W images or sketches. That way I know I've found what I'm looking for. Does this introduce a bias? I honestly don't know. Does it affect what I see, yes, but I don't consider the effect to be negative. I'm far more likely to find details if I know to look for them. My experience with seeing Mirach's Ghost (NGC 404) illustrates what I mean. I can't tell you how many times I've used beta Andromedae to find M31, and never noticed NGC 404. Yes, it's hard to see in the glare of the bright star, but I never even guessed there was something else in the field of view. Someone showed me NGC 404 in a much larger scope. I did a little reading and realized that, under suitable conditions, it should be within the grasp of the 'newt. So I gave it a try and, yep, there it was, and not all that difficult to spot either. Is there potential for bias to feed, shall we say, averted imagination? Yes. But so far I haven't caught myself trying to fill in details I knew should be there, but could not see. (All you have to do is search one of my observing logs for the phrase "did not see...")
--------------------
Tom W.
SVP8 'She turned me into a 3-legged Newt' EQ
Ralph, the All-Purpose 102mm Refractor
Under the Desert Stars
"If we don't change direction soon, we'll end up where we're going." Professor Irwin Corey
|
Starman1
Vendor - Scope City
Reged: 06/24/03
Posts: 10954
Loc: Los Angeles
|
|
Quote:
--retinal insensitivity due to poor dark adaptation
Never experienced this. (Never even heard of it until now.)
--variations in retinal sensitivity due to genetics
None that I'm aware of.
--perceptual bias and how it influences what we see
This is arguably the toughest nut in the basket, since most of the others have some sort of hands-on fix possible. I study pictures of objects when I plan an observing session, preferably low detail B&W images or sketches. That way I know I've found what I'm looking for. Does this introduce a bias? I honestly don't know. Does it affect what I see, yes, but I don't consider the effect to be negative. I'm far more likely to find details if I know to look for them. My experience with seeing Mirach's Ghost (NGC 404) illustrates what I mean. I can't tell you how many times I've used beta Andromedae to find M31, and never noticed NGC 404. Yes, it's hard to see in the glare of the bright star, but I never even guessed there was something else in the field of view. Someone showed me NGC 404 in a much larger scope. I did a little reading and realized that, under suitable conditions, it should be within the grasp of the 'newt. So I gave it a try and, yep, there it was, and not all that difficult to spot either. Is there potential for bias to feed, shall we say, averted imagination? Yes. But so far I haven't caught myself trying to fill in details I knew should be there, but could not see. (All you have to do is search one of my observing logs for the phrase "did not see...")
Tom,
A little clarification:
--retinal insensitivity due to poor dark adaptation. (I see this all the time in observers who come out from a well-lit house or car and start observing before they've been in the dark for at least 30 minutes. What I meant was that faint objects are difficult to see when you are not dark adapted.)
--retinal insensitivity due to poor dark adaptation. (Of course you wouldn't see this. This is the variation that occurs from person to person, and allows one individual to walk in the woods in the dark and not trip, while another has a hard time seeing with a flashlight.)
--perceptual bias and how it influences what we see. You make some good points. Some other aspects of this are:
1.expectations (how many times have you seen details in an object that someone else looks through your scope to see, and their comment is "I can't see anything except a faint little smudge". If you expect the object to be at the limit of your ability to see, you will look for something different than if you think it will be bright. That's perceptual bias).
2.desire (the feeling of dissatisfaction if the object does not live up to Hubble photos. I think this is one of the primary impetuses to super-large scopes. Most of the extra-large scope users I know or have met spend nearly all their times at the eyepiece looking at the same objects that people look at in small scopes. It is partly because they want the objects to look more like photos and provide "showy gratification" rather than to tease the details out and to use vision at the limits. In fairness, I have also met big scope owners who ferret out the truly faint and obscure and spend little time on M13 and the like, but they are fewer in number)
3)image integration in the brain (some of this is in seeing colors in very faint objects. And this is often a matter of experience at very low light viewing)
4)training (as observers gain experience at the eyepiece, they see more. This is a positive perceptual bias, but a bias nonetheless. It is why years of experience at the eyepiece can make a better observer--one who doesn't "overlook" obscure details. Experience counts--NGC404 is visible in most finders 50mm and larger, and 5 or more HII regions in M33 are visible in a 4" refractor (maybe smaller), but not, usually, to the beginner, who recapitulates the story of discovery all over again until he becomes experienced--the idea that a much larger aperture is necessary to find something than to look at it once its location is known. The Veil Nebula is an example.)
Still, a truly in-depth contibution. Thanks, Tom.
--------------------
Don Pensack
12.5" Truss Dob, 5" Maksutov
Sustaining Lifetime IDA member, TeleVue junkie
|
JayKSC
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 01/01/05
Posts: 753
Loc: Florida
|
|
Really good notes considering all that influences our viewing. I was considering something similar to this just the other night, when a neighbor graciously let me borrow his backyard so I could better see the southern skies. I found that I actually missed the huge Live Oak trees that obscure 60 to 70% of my sky... why? I found the open skies in my neighbor's yard to be not as dark: those big trees provide a natural observing dome or tent from which sky glow and glare are nicely blocked!  In relation here, what I once thought hindered my viewing is actually a help.
Quote:
2.desire (the feeling of dissatisfaction if the object does not live up to Hubble photos. I think this is one of the primary impetuses to super-large scopes. Most of the extra-large scope users I know or have met spend nearly all their times at the eyepiece looking at the same objects that people look at in small scopes. It is partly because they want the objects to look more like photos and provide "showy gratification" rather than to tease the details out and to use vision at the limits. In fairness, I have also met big scope owners who ferret out the truly faint and obscure and spend little time on M13 and the like, but they are fewer in number)
Not just big scope owners!  I love to push all of my telescopes to see the faintest possible. I rarely view the brighter objects except to test sky conditions or to show other people the skies. Sure, bright objects like M42 are fun, but they lack that sense of discovery to me. There's more reward in finding some odd, dim, new object I've never seen before - or, better, that few people reportedly have observed.
Tom - I do the same thing with my observing sessions. I usually consult the online STScI Digitized Sky Survey and call up B&W images of what I'd like to observe. I don't believe I'd have found some of the dim nebulae or galaxies I've seen without having done this.
Jay
KSC FL
--------------------
Refractor manic. 
|
Chopin
Canis Insanus
Reged: 02/03/05
Posts: 3376
Loc: In the doghouse.
|
|
It's also amazing that many a blind individual can navigate the streets of New York city successfully. Despite all of those issues you mentioned above Starman1, the resolving power of the human brain can still outweigh any environmental obstacle when pushed enough by wanting. Thanks for this post. For me, it really puts visual reality where it belongs, behind visual desire.
--------------------
JasonŽ
Phlog
|
Thick_asa_Planck
Dark Sky Hunter
Reged: 09/04/04
Posts: 3341
Loc: UK
|
|
Hi Starman,
"the atmosphereic turbulence" - for me, this is just a patience thing. Even the nights that seem bad at first glance often produce moments as clear as the best nights, providing you spend long enough at the eyepiece.
"the atmospheric transparency" - unfortunately i'm in the UK and so don't have CSC - does anyone know if there is some kind of european alternative, because knowing transparency levels before i went outside would be really useful!
These 2 are really the only variables i can comment on.
Also, what do you mean by using the "right" eye for observing? How do you determine which is your best eye?
Alex
--------------------
It is often commonplace to leave the notation ambiguous - Anonymous
|
Starman1
Vendor - Scope City
Reged: 06/24/03
Posts: 10954
Loc: Los Angeles
|
|
Quote:
Hi Starman,
Also, what do you mean by using the "right" eye for observing? How do you determine which is your best eye?
Alex
By using both and evaluating their performances the same way you'd evaluate eyepieces. That's how I know my left eye is more sensitive to light, but has poorer visual acuity, than my right. In my case, I alternate between the two to view extremely faint objects.
I know people, however, who have even greater differences between their eyes. We all express dominance in the preferred choice of which eye to use instinctively, but if experiment proved my non-dominant eye to be the better one, that's what I'd use.
--------------------
Don Pensack
12.5" Truss Dob, 5" Maksutov
Sustaining Lifetime IDA member, TeleVue junkie
|
desertstars
Deja moo
Reged: 11/05/03
Posts: 30012
Loc: Tucson, AZ
|
|
Don- thanks for the clarification. For some reason I read that as some sort of medical condition that would prevent normal dark adaptation!  Silly me. Of course, anytime I go out to observe I start out relatively insensitive. Things start coming clear in about half an hour, but the longer I'm out the better my eyes become at picking up on details. I often go back to an object obeserved early in the session and touch up whatever sketch I made of it.
The genetic component is something I never thought of until you brought it up. As it happens, I've always been better than most folks I know at getting around in the dark. I've been accused of using echo-location. My siblings have had similar experiences, now that I think of it. As a result I've never felt the need to retreat indoors after dark, and that may well have contributed to my becoming an amateur astronomer.
There are so many ways to go from here on perceptual bias that we could do an entire thread on that topic.
Great thread, Don. Thanks for starting it!
--------------------
Tom W.
SVP8 'She turned me into a 3-legged Newt' EQ
Ralph, the All-Purpose 102mm Refractor
Under the Desert Stars
"If we don't change direction soon, we'll end up where we're going." Professor Irwin Corey
|
Thick_asa_Planck
Dark Sky Hunter
Reged: 09/04/04
Posts: 3341
Loc: UK
|
|
Hi Starman,
I instinctively use my left eye to observe, and this is simply because i am always moving the scope as it is not GOTO, so i close my other eye (an eyepatch would be better but i don't have one). I find it more difficult to keep my right eye open when my left eye is closed, however, i don't really notice much difference in clarity between my eyes, even though my left eye is more comfortable to view with.
--------------------
It is often commonplace to leave the notation ambiguous - Anonymous
|
Starman1
Vendor - Scope City
Reged: 06/24/03
Posts: 10954
Loc: Los Angeles
|
|
Quote:
The genetic component is something I never thought of until you brought it up. As it happens, I've always been better than most folks I know at getting around in the dark. I've been accused of using echo-location. My siblings have had similar experiences, now that I think of it. As a result I've never felt the need to retreat indoors after dark, and that may well have contributed to my becoming an amateur astronomer.
Tom,
I'm the same way. When I was young my dark adaptation was so fast I could walk out the door of my home and by the time I reached the bottom of the porch stairs I no longer needed any light. I can still walk into the woods at night without a light and see where I'm going.
I, too, wonder if that had any bearing on my attraction to the hobby in the first place. That, and having mag.6+ skies in my back yard where I grew up. ;-)
In case you wonder why I contribute heavily to the IDA, that same back yard now has Mag 4 skies(and you can't see those because of a Mercury Vapor light on a pole) and the city is 33% smaller in population than it was when I was young!
Of course, now I live in LA and have to drive at least 90 miles to see dark skies. The only saving grace is that my neighborhood has no streetlights of any kind and the Home Owner's *bleep*'n wants to keep it that way.
--------------------
Don Pensack
12.5" Truss Dob, 5" Maksutov
Sustaining Lifetime IDA member, TeleVue junkie
|
matt
Vendor (Scopemania)
Reged: 07/28/03
Posts: 10022
Loc: Chaville, France
|
|
I'm surprised nobody mentioned
-- inability to point the telescope in the proper direction
-- shaky mounts
-- bumping the tube 5° off target while changing from the 30mm to the 18mm after spending 20 minutes to correct our aforementioned inability to point the telescope.
-- inaccurate tracking
--------------------
Matt
CI700 mount with various scopes on top.
|
Mark K
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 12/16/04
Posts: 860
Loc: Bury, Lancashire, UK
|
|
More causes of frustration for amateurs, particularly in the UK :
Most clear skies occur at or around Full Moon, with the exception of lunar eclipse nights, which are always overcast.
Just as I get into the stride of logging and viewing faint fuzzies after midnight, some pesky neighbour insists on switching on their 500-watt halogen lights BEFORE drawing the curtains and retiring, destroying hard-won night adaptation in a second.
A hazy night with high cloud and no star brighter than 2nd-mag is still described as 'clear' according to the Met Office.
Forecasts for clear nights are always downgraded at the last moment; those for overcast nights are always true.
Clear nights in winter coincide with floodlit sporting and concert events.
Faint fuzzies are best seen near the zenith, where it is almost impossible to manoeuvre the scope or finder.
Clear nights are always too windy to do much high-power work.
A clear sky can turn overcast in one minute; an overcast sky takes three days to turn clear.
--------------------
Mark K.
Meade ETX-125
|
Thick_asa_Planck
Dark Sky Hunter
Reged: 09/04/04
Posts: 3341
Loc: UK
|
|
Wow Mark, you nailed exactly what i was thinking, every single point you mentioned is absolutely true - i use BBC Weather and it gives clear readings when it's hazy, it is always cloudy on lunar eclipse nights, and i have a next door neighbour who has a motion activated halogen lamp...
The thing that annoys me most is when the weather reports are incorrect. They are always incorrect the wrong way though - a night predicted to be cloudy is ALWAYS cloudy, but clear sky predictions are often wrong. Cloudy night predictions are never wrong!
I long for the day the sky is predicted cloudy, but the weather reporters get it wrong, and it ends up clear all night!
I also always seem to be looking near the zenith, it really is uncomfortable at times, i have no viewing chair. For me, finding the object in the first place is difficult - i really need a GOTO dob.
This has been a great topic, keep these ironies coming 
There is actually another point i need to make here: have you ever had it when the sky turns overcast in a second, so you pack everything away, look outside 10 minutes later and it is all clear again? That really annoys me...
Alex
--------------------
It is often commonplace to leave the notation ambiguous - Anonymous
|
Mark K
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 12/16/04
Posts: 860
Loc: Bury, Lancashire, UK
|
|
I've had evenings here in Lancashire, England when the sky turned overcast, then it cleared, and then it rained from a clear sky. This was very strange indeed !
(Off-topic)
I was kicking myself for missing a shadow transit of Ganymede this Easter Monday, as we were out visiting for much of the day. The evening was misty, but the brighter stars and planets were visible. I checked my watch - it was 9.30pm, and according to Sky and Telescope, the shadow transit had just ended ten minutes earlier at 9.20pm. Therefore I did not bother bringing out my ETX, but settled down for a cup of tea and a light snack.
As I was about to retire at 10.30pm, I had a feeling of chagrin that I could have seen the shadow transit after all !!
The clocks had been moved forward for BST in the small hours of Easter Sunday - and Sky & Telescope quoted times in UT !
My home arrival time was 8.30pm UT, leaving me with fifty minutes to see the shadow of Ganymede.
WHAT A 42-CARAT PLONKER !
(For non-UK readers, a plonker is an inept, foolish person, popularised in the sitcom 'Only Fools and Horses')
--------------------
Mark K.
Meade ETX-125
|
Starman1
Vendor - Scope City
Reged: 06/24/03
Posts: 10954
Loc: Los Angeles
|
|
Quote:
Just as I get into the stride of logging and viewing faint fuzzies after midnight, some pesky neighbour insists on switching on their 500-watt halogen lights BEFORE drawing the curtains and retiring, destroying hard-won night adaptation in a second.
This is something you can do something about.
Talk to your neighbor. Better yet, have them over for cocktails or dinner, and show him a few of the brightest objects through the scope. Casually mention how the bright light of his destroys your ability to see at night. Suggest you could call him on the night(s) you're planning to observe late so he could leave it off. After all, isn't a guard even more security than a light?
I had this conversation with my neighbor, and he offered to give me a radio-controlled switch so I could turn it off at will! In a later conversation, I told him about the idea of a completely shielded light (with the reduction in electricity, better visibility, etc), and he changed his light! Now I can barely see it, and I still have a radio remote control. Wow. All it took was raising the issue in a pleasant environment.
At a later party, he asked if I'd bring the scope out, and everyone looked for a couple hours.
Of course, your neighbor could be Mr. Narcissus, but you never know until you talk.
--------------------
Don Pensack
12.5" Truss Dob, 5" Maksutov
Sustaining Lifetime IDA member, TeleVue junkie
|
Starman1
Vendor - Scope City
Reged: 06/24/03
Posts: 10954
Loc: Los Angeles
|
|
Quote:
I'm surprised nobody mentioned
-- inability to point the telescope in the proper direction
-- shaky mounts
-- bumping the tube 5° off target while changing from the 30mm to the 18mm after spending 20 minutes to correct our aforementioned inability to point the telescope.
-- inaccurate tracking
Matt,
Absolutely. These affect a lot of amateurs. Until I put a brake on my dob, I lost the object every time I changed eyepieces. A true PITA.
--------------------
Don Pensack
12.5" Truss Dob, 5" Maksutov
Sustaining Lifetime IDA member, TeleVue junkie
|
half meter
Postmaster
Reged: 05/05/04
Posts: 12517
Loc: Great Lakes
|
|
Here's another big one: sleepiness (or lack of it). Concentration really suffers as one gets tired.
I seem to be able to stay up all night for a couple of days in a row if need be. 4 hours of sleep in a night is fine when coupled with a few 5 minute cat naps sprinkled through the day.
Certainly, one all nighter is no problem for me, and it's been that way for most of my life. I used to lay awake in bed as a kid with my AM radio on, listening to stations from all over the USA and Mexico as conditions allowed. My in-laws call me the Prince of Darkness
Is it any wonder I like astronomy?
--------------------
Gary
Collins I3 (Thin Film) Image Intensifying Eyepiece
Coronado Maxscope DS 90 <0.5A w/BF30
152 mm f/8 TMB/A&M Carbon Fiber APO; f/5 with 4" Borg ED Field Flattener/Reducer
20" Obsession/OMI Mirror/Servocat/Argo Navis
 First Light for the 30" Obsession at BEOTS!
|
Starman1
Vendor - Scope City
Reged: 06/24/03
Posts: 10954
Loc: Los Angeles
|
|
Quote:
Here's another big one: sleepiness (or lack of it). Concentration really suffers as one gets tired.
I seem to be able to stay up all night for a couple of days in a row if need be. 4 hours of sleep in a night is fine when coupled with a few 5 minute cat naps sprinkled through the day.
Certainly, one all nighter is no problem for me, and it's been that way for most of my life. I used to lay awake in bed as a kid with my AM radio on, listening to stations from all over the USA and Mexico as conditions allowed. My in-laws call me the Prince of Darkness
Is it any wonder I like astronomy?
You haven't lived the life of an amateur astronomer until you realize at 4:30am you've been sleeping with your head leaning on the eyepiece.
I'm with you about the fatigue. My most serious, detailed observations are always before 2 or 3am. After that, my notes become somewhat, um, sketchier.
--------------------
Don Pensack
12.5" Truss Dob, 5" Maksutov
Sustaining Lifetime IDA member, TeleVue junkie
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
There is one more:
-- Your wife thinks you're crazy and wants you to come back in and not catch a cold.
By the way: "half meter", where are really dark locations in SE MI not too far from the big city (Detroit)? I live in the east side suburbs and both my neighbors have 500W flood lamps, plus the streetlights from the next bigger road are killing me.
I usually take the telescope up to the Lake Huron area and have been able to see M97, M1 and the brighter M's so far.
|
jdickson
professor emeritus
Reged: 04/26/04
Posts: 685
Loc: Desert Hot Springs, Ca
|
|
Good thing we have cloudy nights occasionally to catch up on sleep.  I'll be doing a long one tonight so I had to drag myelf away from the scope early last night. Leo's galaxies are moving into prime viewing! 
Sometimes I just have to ignore all the little issues that affect the ability to see anything and just observe. I'll find myself obsessing about something when I should be looking and concentrating on "seeing more".
Clear Sky clock looks awsome tonight!
Clear Skies!
--------------------
Joe
10" f5 ATM dob, 20x80 p-mount binos.
|
half meter
Postmaster
Reged: 05/05/04
Posts: 12517
Loc: Great Lakes
|
|
Quote:
By the way: "half meter", where are really dark locations in SE MI not too far from the big city (Detroit)? I live in the east side suburbs and both my neighbors have 500W flood lamps, plus the streetlights from the next bigger road are killing me.
I usually take the telescope up to the Lake Huron area and have been able to see M97, M1 and the brighter M's so far.
I'm still looking for them myself! Seriously, if you head up towards the thumb area it gets pretty dark. Check out Clear Sky Clock -- it has light pollution ratings and a map for each listed site.
--------------------
Gary
Collins I3 (Thin Film) Image Intensifying Eyepiece
Coronado Maxscope DS 90 <0.5A w/BF30
152 mm f/8 TMB/A&M Carbon Fiber APO; f/5 with 4" Borg ED Field Flattener/Reducer
20" Obsession/OMI Mirror/Servocat/Argo Navis
First Light for the 30" Obsession at BEOTS!
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
To this add -
a.) Alcoholic stupor
b.) Not owning any eyepieces
c.) Owning eyepieces but not fully understanding the importance of their presence in a telescope focusser because of a.)
d.) Dew
e.) Cloud
f.) Neighbour's security lighting
g.) Not being able to relax and take in the image detail because of the constant, constant, constant barking of next door's Alsation.
h.) Lots of unsettling invertebrates scuttling around in the grass.
i.) a, c, d, f, g, h,....all in the same night. Did anyone see the movie 'Falling Down'?
|
Mr. Bill
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 02/09/05
Posts: 2756
Loc: Just passing through.....
|
|
Here's another idea.....
Take a nap and get up at midnight or later.
This allows you to observe with a clear head and fresh eyes and extends the observing time without moon way past the new moon.
Also, the dewpoint has been reached and the air has less humidity to deal with. The seeing and transparency is typically the best its going to be, at least in my location (northeastern Cal high desert @ 5000 ft.)
I frequently get up at 1 or 2am and stay up until astromonical twilight. This allows me to observe when everything is quiet and also the bonus of scanning for comets in the morning twilight.
And, you get to observe the "next season's" sky.
--------------------
10x50 Fujinon FMT-SX binos
15x70 AP binos + Paragon p-mount
Oberwerk 100BT 45 degree + Hercules fork mount
120mm f/5 Orion achromat + Moonlite focuser
140mm f/5.7 Vixen NeoAchro Petzvel refractor
150mm f/6.5 Antares achromat
150mm f/8 homemade achromat....EE Barnard MW Sweeper
8 inch newt with f/5 Swayze mirror
10 inch f/4.7 Orion newt + Paracorr
15 inch f/5 Discovery split tube
35mm Pan, 26mm Nagler, 17mm Nagler, 13mm Ethos, 8mm Ethos
Member IDA
|
desertstars
Deja moo
Reged: 11/05/03
Posts: 30012
Loc: Tucson, AZ
|
|
Quote:
Take a nap and get up at midnight or later.
This strategy has a lot to recommend it. (I even do it to observe later phases of the Moon.  )
--------------------
Tom W.
SVP8 'She turned me into a 3-legged Newt' EQ
Ralph, the All-Purpose 102mm Refractor
Under the Desert Stars
"If we don't change direction soon, we'll end up where we're going." Professor Irwin Corey
|
jdickson
professor emeritus
Reged: 04/26/04
Posts: 685
Loc: Desert Hot Springs, Ca
|
|
Did that Saturday. Works really well. The sky was better, it was quieter and more fun because I wasn't tired. Logged quite a few Coma Berenices galaxies and some coming attractions: M13,M57.
--------------------
Joe
10" f5 ATM dob, 20x80 p-mount binos.
|
Starman1
Vendor - Scope City
Reged: 06/24/03
Posts: 10954
Loc: Los Angeles
|
|
This is a very relevant thread for anyone contemplating why certain observers see some things and others don't:
Go to the | | |
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
[Re: