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
Mr. Mike
professor emeritus
Reged: 11/08/05
Posts: 501
Loc: Churchville, NY
|
|
Quote:
I differ from you on a number of points but would like to single this one out: do you have figures to back this up? Your use of the word "majority" strongly suggests that you do - so please share.
But even if this _is_ the case ... even if the % of subscribers interested in this topic is relatively low ... does it make no sense to try to _build_ interest in the subject?
One of my main complaints about S & T as it is now is that the articles by Gary Seronik on telescope making are so short, they are hardly articles. This subscriber would like to see more. To me, the two main words in the name "Sky and Telescope" should be each as important as the other, or nearly: and for me the word "Telescope" is not exhausted by reviews of commercial products.
My Humble Opinion only.
Fair enough...I figured some people would feel that way. I guess I have no data to back it up, other than almost everyones signatures and equipment lists here contain at least one if not more than one purchased scope. Rarely do I see home-made scopes on their lists.
Now... if you can make a home-made scope, more power to you! But, I feel that magazines such as those mentioned will likely have a user-base comprised of many newbies that have or are going to purchase a scope and want to see reviews about them and then they want help navigating around the sky.
My opinion, of course. 
--------------------
Stellarvue NextGen 80mm ED
Meade 7x50 Binos
Takahashi LE 7.5mm
Vixen LVW 22mm
Vixen LVW 13mm
|
chexmix
sage
Reged: 12/01/04
Posts: 333
Loc: Arlington, MA, USA
|
|
Quote:
My opinion, of course.
I think it's only natural to express our wishes for the magazine we personally would like the best.  Shoot, mine would be darned near physically impossible to sustain!
--------------------
8" Discovery DHQ
Celestron C102-HD
9x63 Orion mini-giants
(2) Frontally-placed visual organs, incl. lens, vitreous/aqueous humors, assorted rods, cones.
|
Newstar One
newbie
Reged: 11/17/07
Posts: 2
|
|
Jimmy Carter? Hell, I remember Harry Truman. Age does give one perspective, as does a master's in American history.
|
mcoren
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 01/11/06
Posts: 1084
Loc: Northern Virginia, USA
|
|
Quote:
Jimmy Carter? Hell, I remember Harry Truman. Age does give one perspective, as does a master's in American history.
Today's college students don't even remember New Coke!
--------------------
Mike
Orion SkyQuest XT10
Suburban Washington DC
|
Jim Cook
journeyman
Reged: 06/19/05
Posts: 5
|
|
Having waded through this thread, I'd like to offer my opinions:
- Yes, I am fond of both S&T and Astronomy. I subscribe to both, both out of interest and support.
- I suspect a significant portion of the readers are armchair astronomers, like myself, for one reason or another. Don't underestimate our economic impact to the subscriber base!
- I also suspect that there are a significant number of armchair ATMers. That is, we are unlikely to build things, but we love to read about it.
- By the way, it has been said America is becoming less of a "Do it yourself" country and more of a "Do it for me" country. This statement was made in automotive circles and yet the hot rod magazines continue. That said, compare my youth in the 1960s to now: Heathkit and other electronic kits are gone, amateur radio on a similar path (discrete components reduced to a chip), chemistry sets are emasculated (legal and toxic waste fears gone awry), routine family car work also limited (but for different reasons), the Amateur Scientist column gone from Scientific American, ... Don't have the astronomy magazines join this trend!
- I do think the balance of articles is good between observing, ATM, science, and opinion. I have enjoyed the few articles in a last few years, like "Whatever happened to so-and-so or manufacturer x?" If S&T is up for tinkering with the format a little, perhaps one article in each issue should be labeled "Master Class" and another be labeled "History" each month. I know that Fine Woodworking magazine did the former starting a few years ago and I believe it has served them well.
- Don't you editor-types of different magazines communicate through the back channel? I don't mean just astro magazines, but all magazines. Can't the editor at S&T take the editor at Fine Woodworking out to lunch for an afternoon to talk about what works and what doesn't work? Can't all you editors of all magazines have your own private conference with workshops? You would be surprised at the lessons in common.
- I would welcome a PDF of the magazine, but the whole magazine, advertisements and all, not just the articles. I would appreciate it one year per CDROM with an updated master index each year.
- I would really welcome a PDF archive of all issues, dating back to issue 1, including "The Sky" and "The Telescope". Call me a completist, but it should be possible. I know that National Geographic magazine has offered this, as well as The New Yorker magazine. I believe National Geographic was just scans of the pages (and there were complaints that the dpi was too low), but the New Yorker may have been scanned into text. What I'm saying here is (a) a complete archive is possible, and (b) there are several levels to choose from: scans only, scans with a searchable master index, or scans where the text is searchable/selectable/pastable. However, compared to the present state (nothing available), I'll take whatever I can get. By the way, I see nothing that says it will cannibalize sales of current issues.
- I do wonder about the Q&A column. I enjoyed it and wished some of the answers were much longer. It was two pages, then one page, then ??? I also had a couple comments about its technical editing, but that's another topic.
- Lastly, yes, more scantily-clad women!
Cheers!
|
Glen A W
member
Reged: 07/04/08
Posts: 10
|
|
When they published a back-page article in which a woman compared her scopes to her former boyfriends, I decided not to renew. How I wish Sky and Telescope could get back to being a logical, cold hard hobby and science magazine like they were in the 1960's and 1970's.
|
auriga
sage
Reged: 03/02/06
Posts: 369
|
|
[quote (snip)
(snip)
The internet is knocking off niche-publications because companies who once had to advertise in them don't have to any more. This has put even more pressure on mags like S&T with regard to equipment reviews: they simply cannot afford to print a negative equipment review no matter how loudly they proclaim objectivity. S&T won't hesitate to print a negative book review, however.
(snip)
[Reply]
Yes, and I am concerned that is some cases one negative review in a premier magazine like Sky & Telescope might greatly affect the sales of a book, based on the opinion of a single reviewer, perhaps doing his or her first book review for Sky & Telescope.
Publishers seem to be much smaller advertisers than are equipment makers. Is it a coincidence that books are reviewed much more harshly than equipment? In equipment reviews, all is sweetness and light. Not so with book reviews.
I was particularly distressed by the review of Craig Crossen and Gerald Rhemann's wonderful book, Sky Vistas: Astronomy for Binoculars and Richest-Field Telescopes (Springer, New York and Vienna, 2004, the only major modern book that deals in detail with observing with richest field telescopes. Crossen is inspiring as well as erudite; Rhemann's photographs remind one of Hans Vehrenberg's work. A lovely and useful book. I think it is regrettable that Sky & Telescope is such a dominant source.
Bill Meyers
|
peashooter
member
Reged: 07/07/07
Posts: 68
Loc: Central USA
|
|
Quote:
.... though we are concentrating primarily here on the astronomy mags, the same problem exists for virtually all "hobby" mags!
And virtually all print and news media as well! For example - 30 or 40 years ago the New York Times was a respected source of news. Now in an era when nuclear-armed terrorists threaten the whole world, the Times' headlines are as likely as not to be be speculative journalism about Britney Spears' latest addiction.
Another poster mentioned that light pollution's adverse role in our hobby has been underestimated - yes! It used to be called "backyard astronomy." These days when one must spend $25 to $30 and up round trip for gas just to drive somewhere to get decent skies, people are staying home - and staying indoors.
|
Jeff Morgan
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 09/28/03
Posts: 1397
Loc: Prescott, AZ
|
|
Quote:
These days when one must spend $25 to $30 and up round trip for gas just to drive somewhere to get decent skies, people are staying home - and staying indoors.
I doubt it. One can hardly get a round of golf for less than $50 and it remains a hugely popular pastime. Unless you're talking high-end imaging, astronomy remains (or can remain) a fairly low-expense hobby.
--------------------
Jeff Morgan
Prescott, AZ
Wile E. Coyote School of Telescope Making
|
Glen A W
member
Reged: 07/04/08
Posts: 10
|
|
My boat has a 2.5hp Suzuki engine which will run all day on a gallon of gas. But the truck to haul it takes $22 of gas for the round trip to the nearest lake, so I am definitely cutting back. I would be out on the water everyday, otherwise. I think I may get a small trailer for my Toyota Echo.
Light pollution has encroached on Bridgeport, West Virginia such that I don't observe much. The seeing was always awful so the planets are not much use. The Moon is just about it for me. If I can't observe from the convenience and comfort of my patio then I will just read books on the subject instead. I don't enjoy going out to the middle of nowhere. I always forget something important!
Astronomy has as much interest as ever, but TELESCOPES just can't deliver on what people expect these days. It's due both to the light pollution and the public's higher expectations due to images seen on the news and in science fiction. I just hate to show somebody Saturn and hear how small it looks - in a C-14!
Back when I first started, I could see the Milky Way every night and a 60mm refractor could deliver on lots of Messier objects.
|
kenren10
member
Reged: 06/05/06
Posts: 17
Loc: Delaware, USA
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
.... though we are concentrating primarily here on the astronomy mags, the same problem exists for virtually all "hobby" mags!
And virtually all print and news media as well! For example - 30 or 40 years ago the New York Times was a respected source of news. Now in an era when nuclear-armed terrorists threaten the whole world, the Times' headlines are as likely as not to be be speculative journalism about Britney Spears' latest addiction.
Nuclear-armed terrorists threaten the whole world? You're right, I can't find that in the NYT...or anywhere else. True, the Times ain't what it used to be, but where is this "news" coming from?
curious, that's all 
--------------------
Vixen ED80Sf
Vixen porta Alt-Az
Orion 127 Mak-Cass
Orion SVP EQ mount
Orion Paragon-Plus XHD Tripod
eBay special 6" f5 Newtonian (donated by a frustrated friend - used as a "decoy" to alert neighbors I will be observing that night)
Nikon 8x42 Binos
Garrett 8x45 Binos
Tasco 10x50 Binos
Baader Hyperion & TMB planetary eyepieces
Tele-vue 2.5x PowerMate
Mixed box o' Plossls, barlows etc.
|
Crossen
member
Reged: 07/14/08
Posts: 27
Loc: Vienna
|
|
To Auriga, on "Sky Vistas":
Thanks for your comments about "Sky Vistas" on July 29. Yes, Tony's review did have a limited negative impact upon sales of the book. However, two things about the book blunted that impact. First was the academic reputation of the publisher, Springer-Verlag of Vienna: literally hundreds of academic libraries worldwide bought the book. Second, as a "speciality" book, its sales are more dependent on the word-of-mouth judgement of specialists like yourself than of a single review.
I myself pay little attention to the judgements of reviews (although I confess I've written 2 or 3 reviews for "Astronomy"!). I look to them strictly for information about what's in a book and how it approaches its subject, not on whether the reviewer found the book "good" or "bad." But I enjoy a well-written review for its own sake--Even if I know the book and think the reviewer completely wrong about it, I really enjoy good writing.
Though there is an article in the September "Astronomy" by Gerald Rhemann and me, I don't often write for the magazines anymore, and the main reason goes back to something a couple of the correspondents mentioned earlier in this discussion: that for more than a decade the magazines have been de-emphasizing observing articles. The whole emphasis of my writing, beginning in "Binocular Astronomy" but even more so in "Sky Vistas" is describing what can be seen in certain types of instruments and explaining the astronomical reasons why each object appears the way it does or is located where it is.
Craig Crossen
|
Jay_Bird
professor emeritus
Reged: 01/04/06
Posts: 659
Loc: Nevada 36N 115W
|
|
Just a "Thanks!" for Binocular Astronomy - purchased 2-3 years ago, a real standout among my bookshelf and frequently used.
--------------------
'these things stand like stone - kindness in another's troubles, courage in your own' Gordon
|
Rick Woods
Post Laureate
Reged: 01/27/05
Posts: 3921
Loc: Inner Solar System
|
|
Speaking of "Binocular Astronomy", which I purchased many years ago (after reading Alan MacRobert's high praise): In almost every catalog or ad I've seen for that book, it's listed as being something like 224 pages; but if you count every page including the covers, the real count is something like 186 pages.
That's not the problem: the problem is, just try calling one of the places running the ads and getting them to correct it! I called Orion and Sky Pub several times, but the ads kept listing the wrong page count. Oh well. It's a great book, no matter how many pages it has. But I can't help but wonder where that other count came from.
--------------------
- Rick
14" LX200GPS
8" Meade 826C
|
John Jarosz
I'm being watched...
Reged: 04/25/04
Posts: 2149
Loc: Chicago area, IL
|
|
The points many people have made about advertising in S&T and other niche publications are true. What most people don't realize is that all print media are currently experiencing the same phenomenon. In all of the major newspapers (NYC, Chicago, LA, etc) advertising revenue is dropping like a rock while readership remains about the same. Advertisers realize that they can better track the performance of the advertising dollars (and in-house sales) online rather than in print. No one in the newspaper industry has any idea how to stop the loss of advertising revenue. All newspapers are at risk with respect to survival. It's no wonder that niche publications are probably the first to go, as the net is the king of narrowcasting information to niche groups all over the world.
I think that the net has changed people's taste in what they want for entertainment or information. The net lets them be as narrow as they want in selection of the information they choose to receive. Broadcasting does not let them choose as they have to listen to whatever the broadcaster sends out. The new preference is to only accept the material that one wants. Some may view this as very parochial and narrow minded, but that's what the evidence points to.
Times change, I guess. 
John
--------------------
6" F4.6(w/Paracorr) GEM reflector, 8" F11 Dall Relay Scope
6" F5 RFT Refractor, Garrett Gemini 20x80 LW
|
auriga
sage
Reged: 03/02/06
Posts: 369
|
|
To Craig Crossen,
I will be sure to get the September 2008 issue of Astronomy so I can read your article with Gerald Rhemann, on the Southern Milky Way.
Have you seen Bill Tschumy's elegant computer program, "Where is M 13?" It shows visually the position in our galaxy of hundreds of deep sky objects and presents a bit of data on each. I would think it might be an excellent companion to the more erudite and poetic treatment of many of these objects in your book. Tschumy's program is quite inexpensive and a trial version can be downloaded free.
One of the many gems I would like to thank you for calling to my attention is Baade's Window, which as you point out, is a small gap in the dense dust clouds in Sagittarius that hide the center of our galaxy from our view. Through his small gap, identified by Walter Baade, amateur telescopes can see two small globular clusters that are relatively close to the center of our galaxy.
Your book, a gift to us amateurs, sits on my shelf next to Burnham and NSOG but does not overlap much with either, except in love of the skies.
Bill Meyers
Quote:
To Auriga, on "Sky Vistas":
Thanks for your comments about "Sky Vistas" on July 29. Yes, Tony's review did have a limited negative impact upon sales of the book. However, two things about the book blunted that impact. First was the academic reputation of the publisher, Springer-Verlag of Vienna: literally hundreds of academic libraries worldwide bought the book. Second, as a "speciality" book, its sales are more dependent on the word-of-mouth judgement of specialists like yourself than of a single review.
I myself pay little attention to the judgements of reviews (although I confess I've written 2 or 3 reviews for "Astronomy"!). I look to them strictly for information about what's in a book and how it approaches its subject, not on whether the reviewer found the book "good" or "bad." But I enjoy a well-written review for its own sake--Even if I know the book and think the reviewer completely wrong about it, I really enjoy good writing.
Though there is an article in the September "Astronomy" by Gerald Rhemann and me, I don't often write for the magazines anymore, and the main reason goes back to something a couple of the correspondents mentioned earlier in this discussion: that for more than a decade the magazines have been de-emphasizing observing articles. The whole emphasis of my writing, beginning in "Binocular Astronomy" but even more so in "Sky Vistas" is describing what can be seen in certain types of instruments and explaining the astronomical reasons why each object appears the way it does or is located where it is.
Craig Crossen
|
Crossen
member
Reged: 07/14/08
Posts: 27
Loc: Vienna
|
|
Over the past couple days I've had a chance to reread carefully all the contributions to this long and thought-inspiring thread. Not least impressive is the literary level of these contributions--a lot of it is blamed good writing!! It is evidence that there is some good stuff on the Internet. (And a great tribute to the readership of CN.)
Of course you have to dig through a lot of blue mud to find the diamonds. And the mottos still have to be "buyer beware" and "you get what you pay for"--because I've seen a surprising numbers of typos and errors in fact even on the web sites of places like the University of Chicago Oriental Institute and the British Museum. They face the question of how much time (money) to invest in proofreading texts on such a disposable medium as the Internet.
One of the recurrent themes of this thread has been the difference between words and images and a computer screen and words and images on paper. It comes down to a sense of permanence: to destroy the words and images on a computer screen all you have to do is move a finger; but if you want to destroy a piece of paper you at least have to go to the kitchen for a match. And have you ever tried to burn a book?--they fight for life. It's wonderful. (This is one of the themes of Terry Pratchett's splendid DiscWorld novel "Going Postal.")
So long as people enjoy words and the things they say, there will always be a place for hard copy. And one of the evidences for that affirmation I offer would be this thread.
But are there enough people today who like serious amateur astronomy to keep two magazines afloat? A couple writers above mentioned the change in culture in America between the 1960s and today. Around 1970 my senior high school, with a total enrollment of less than 500 students , offered SIX full years of sciences. In the 1990s that same school, with more than twice the enrollment, offered just TWO years. The society as a whole does not encourage its youth to pursue science (or any other intellectual curiosity) with the same enthusiasm and conviction it did several decades ago. I suspect and fear that the troubles with the astronomy magazines reflect a deeper and more sinister problem than just the economics of the publishing industry.
|
PDG
journeyman
Reged: 01/16/08
Posts: 6
Loc: Orrington, Maine USA
|
|
I think the Internet gives these magazines opportunities.
The issue for these publishers should be how to use the Internet to enhance revenue rather than to see the Internet as competition.
Many here have expressed their attraction to 'hard copy'. I use the Internet a lot but I still appreciate reading from professionally produced magazines.
Why not provide a content-on-demand capability to enhance each issue? Let users choose at least some of the content of each 'issue' (see below) by making selections from a registered, online account.
I'd pay an annual subscription fee, but I'd actually be paying for print-on-demand privileges for a fixed number of issues or fixed number of pages.
I'd get a magazine tailored to my interests, targeted advertising, plus content selected by the editors.
Peter
(I'd also be willing to pay for a bigger picture of Sue French  )
|
auriga
sage
Reged: 03/02/06
Posts: 369
|
|
Quote:
To Auriga, on "Sky Vistas":
(snip)
"... describing what can be seen in certain types of instruments and explaining the astronomical reasons why each object appears the way it does or is located where it is."
(snip)
Craig Crossen
Craig,
I have just read the article you and Gerald Rhemann wrote in the September issue of Astronomy, and it is of a piece with Binocular Astronomy and Sky Vistas: besides describing the object, you explain the why of the object, why it looks as it does and why it is where it is.
This approach is very unusual in astronomy magazines. To me, it contributes to the "majesty" of the observing experience more than do columns, no matter how charming or otherwise meritorious, that merely describe the object and its appearance.
There is one other writer of articles in the astronomy magazines, who takes the approach you do: Charles Wood's columns in Sky & Telescope, and his marvelous book, The Modern Moon, also reflect a deep interest in why, in meaning, in significance, in a scientific sense.
There are many fine descriptive writers, who give only brief or no attention to why, and I enjoy their articles and have benefited from them for many years. But my heart is with the few who also tell us what it means.
Bill Meyers
|
Crossen
member
Reged: 07/14/08
Posts: 27
Loc: Vienna
|
|
As an observer, light pollution was never a problem for me because I lived for many years on a central Minnesota farm out under dark skies. But as an astronomy writer it IS a problem for me because I know the people I wish to write for can't simply step outside under the stars like I used to: most must drive an hour or more to get to half-dark skies. However, the article with Gerald is an example of how I as a writer, am trying to cope with the problem of
readers who can't observe as much as they would like: writing what amounts to an extended caption for a theme-centered series of astro-photos. Nothing can replace the experience of seeing "real" photons that came from a star or nebula or galaxy: but there is much beauty and much good astronomy in an excellent astrophoto which a writer can point out to a reader. Because of Gerald's wonderful photos, I was able to write "Sky Vistas" as much for the armchair observer as the field observer.
|
|
1 registered and 9 anonymous users are browsing this forum.
Moderator: asaint, spaceydee
Print Thread
|
Forum Permissions
You cannot start new topics
You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled
UBBCode is enabled
|
Thread views: 4110
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
[Re: 
Edit
Reply
Quote
