Telescope Reviews: Sketch now contains original from eyepiece

Erika

I wrote 1105 UT not 11 AM if you see the sketch again at the top as that is the actual 11 UT time simultaneously to our 4 PM here in the Pacific. I worked in the largest computer center on the west coast for over 20 years- We used military or UT time 24/7. The lead supervisor referred to my watch to set the mainframe computer clock as I set my watch to WWV Fort Collins Colorado, the National Bureau of Standards on the shortwave radio band which broadcasts UT time constantly which I listened to since age 13. Forgive me for the bio here. Yes, I understand quite well 11 AM as morning and 2300 as 11 PM at night.

I noticed that Steve Aimes sketches his prominences as rather oversized to the ratio of the suns disc circle on his forms. Is this viewed as technically accurate?

You mentioned that working from memory later is not accurate. Do some people not have photographic memory? How do we know this to be true or not true as to what actual real time obsrvation is from the eyepiece? I think it is interesting that you mentioned the other day how you will observe repeatedly until you finally touch the pencil or chalk to the paper for the first time.

Yes I have observed the suns changes for thousands of hours in an h-alpha since I began doing this in 1999 with a spectacular Daystar h-alpha mated to the local clubs 8 inch Cassegrain. I just wish I'd been sketching all those huge prominences back then during solar max in 1999 ~ 2004. Perhaps I'd be in a museum by now?

It is true that I rendered that first sketch on October 13th 2006 after being inspired by yours and Les Cowley’s conte crayon sketches in Spaceweather that afternoon which I decided to complete at 3 AM the following morning with the creative experience of several images of that great prominence as I watched it change dynamically and thus I produced it into a wild abstract that appeared to shock the world as Dr Tony Phillips displayed it for three days on his front page. It also initiated an international art contest in his site that I suggested he ask others to participate in for the Mercury Transit on Nov 8th.

Some people prefer to use the word embellish – I am not sure how that word applies here. Definitions include: Decorate, adorn, embroider, beautify, make fancy, make elegant, emboss, exaggerate, elaborate, enhance, enlarge, increase size, etc. I would choose “Enhance” over these other definitions. Definitely not to add false details. I am merely trying to produce an artists accurate rendering that captures the initial “feeling” of aesthetic nature at that moment it is observed. This is a major part of astronomy. I like to add the ambience of the reality- My hand is actually there while holding the chalk and doing the sketch. I am also not one to manipulate photography of the objects in the sky. I know this is a subject of great controversy in reproduced imagery today in astronomy when we see images from the Internet and TV.

If I may divert slightly here for the sake of example- I know that Timothy Ferris defends his film Seeing in the Dark aired on PBS last fall, where other customers who purchased the film criticize the images simulated through a telescope and onto the movie screen. I admire his books, filmwork and passion for observational astronomy. Ferris retorts in his own review in Amazon.com and states that he degraded images of Mars in the film so as to closely depict the way the planet would actually look trough the telescope to a live observer. Where several customers who purchased the film complained that the images looked too good and over colorful on the screen compared to the live observation and that this would mislead viewers.

Conversely, I am also in concurrence with John Dobson about the importance of live observation vs. photography of images in telescopes, as I have spent much time with him and the local public on the streets here and at schools where I took him. Dobson is extremely controversial about his live observation as we know, where I am not that extreme about it as he is.

I have looked at the art forum but I see no one making intense solar observations and earful renderings there. I thought I would be in the wrong group there and left out of the solar observing group. So I will try to increase my work toward technically accurate art. I hope it will be accepted as such as I have been told al my life that I am in a category that defies description. I take that as a great compliment.

And I love to take the harshest of criticism. I think it goes beyond the rules and becomes perceived language interpretation that begs for more discussion.

I am learning the CN Forum rules now and will make sincere efforts to comply with art vs science.

-Mark

Edited by markseibold (05/31/08 09:35 PM)