Return to the Cloudy Nights Telescope Reviews home page


Speciality Forums >> Astro Art, Books, Websites & Other Media

Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | (show all)
deepskytraveler
super member
*****

Reged: 12/25/05

Loc: Worthington, OH
New Edition of Uranometria 2000
      #5529971 - 11/20/12 12:00 PM

Uranometria 2000 Deep Sky Atlas All Sky, Pole-to-Pole Edition in a single volume. Did I miss the announcement? Anyone seen it yet?

-Mark


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
CounterWeight
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 10/05/08

Loc: Palo alto, CA.
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: deepskytraveler]
      #5530149 - 11/20/12 01:20 PM

Came up top on a google search here...

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
swalker
Imaging Editor - Sky & Telescope
*****

Reged: 01/22/07

Loc: 42.9225°N, 71.2242°W
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: CounterWeight]
      #5530271 - 11/20/12 02:12 PM

apparently it combines volume 1 and 2. Still looks interesting though

Edited by swalker (11/20/12 02:14 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Starman1
Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)
*****

Reged: 06/24/03

Loc: Los Angeles
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: swalker]
      #5530475 - 11/20/12 03:45 PM

Thanks for the heads up. It will eliminate the duplicate charts from +6 degrees to -6 degrees, and be a lot easier to use.
It's a lot cheaper than the 2-volumes, too, so if there is a difference, I'll post it here.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
LivingNDixie
TSP Chowhound
*****

Reged: 04/23/03

Loc: Trussville, AL
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: Starman1]
      #5531227 - 11/20/12 10:42 PM

Don,
You have one ordered?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Starman1
Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)
*****

Reged: 06/24/03

Loc: Los Angeles
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: LivingNDixie]
      #5531259 - 11/20/12 11:02 PM

Yes.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Daniel Mounsey
Vendor (Woodland Hills)
*****

Reged: 06/12/02

Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: Starman1]
      #5531332 - 11/20/12 11:40 PM

Oh boy, I hope this wasn't the book they were telling me about at NEAIC. I was informed of something more of a good read on modern deep sky but something still special for field use.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
LivingNDixie
TSP Chowhound
*****

Reged: 04/23/03

Loc: Trussville, AL
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: Daniel Mounsey]
      #5531551 - 11/21/12 05:53 AM

Don,
Glad to hear you have it ordered. I await your review.

Daniel,
Why no love for Uranomertri?. It is probably one of the best printed star atlas out there that is easily available.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Rich (RLTYS)
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 12/18/04

Loc: New York (Long Island)
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: deepskytraveler]
      #5531634 - 11/21/12 07:55 AM

The new atlas looks quite interesting. I like the detailed charts of selected areas of the sky. I have the two volumes of the origional Uranometria 2000.

Rich (RLTYS)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
deepskytraveler
super member
*****

Reged: 12/25/05

Loc: Worthington, OH
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: Rich (RLTYS)]
      #5532092 - 11/21/12 11:51 AM

Rich,

I don't have the original Uranometria 2000. Are the 29 detailed "close-up" charts a new addition to this edition?

-Mark


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Daniel Mounsey
Vendor (Woodland Hills)
*****

Reged: 06/12/02

Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: LivingNDixie]
      #5532119 - 11/21/12 12:04 PM

Quote:


Daniel,
Why no love for Uranomertri?. It is probably one of the best printed star atlas out there that is easily available.




Preston,

No worries there. I LOVE Uranometria. That Atlas saved me during detailed star locating through the eyepiece while searching for variable stars. After talking with the publisher though, they were talking about something similar to Burnham's.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jeff Morgan
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 09/28/03

Loc: Prescott, AZ
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: swalker]
      #5534345 - 11/22/12 07:20 PM

Quote:

apparently it combines volume 1 and 2. Still looks interesting though




Interesting indeed. Even though I am on the cusp of making SkySafari my primary atlas, I would likely spring for a new version. Something so satisfying about a cold rainy night, a comfy chair, hot coffee and cocoa, and a great atlas.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Daniel Mounsey
Vendor (Woodland Hills)
*****

Reged: 06/12/02

Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: Jeff Morgan]
      #5534366 - 11/22/12 07:45 PM

I use Sky Safari now but interestingly, using the charts from Uranometria are actually easier when comparing stars through the eyepiece. It's quite accurate.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Starman1
Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)
*****

Reged: 06/24/03

Loc: Los Angeles
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: Daniel Mounsey]
      #5535158 - 11/23/12 10:01 AM

I still find that the direct light of a smartphone, tablet, or laptop is FAR more injurious to my night vision than the indirect light of a dim red LED flashlight on a printed page. Of course, that's not without difficulties, either, but it's a matter of degree.

In the event you are at a place where full dark adaptation is not possible, or the targets being viewed don't require it, then pretty much anything goes.

The proliferation of phones, tablets, and laptops at dark sky sites, though, is becoming quite annoying.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Daniel Mounsey
Vendor (Woodland Hills)
*****

Reged: 06/12/02

Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: Starman1]
      #5535220 - 11/23/12 10:39 AM

http://siriusastroproducts.com/products---red-eyes-computeriphonedslr-light-s...

Also, Alvin Huey uses a small PC with a black background and you can hardly see the screen when dimmed.

Also note that in my case dark adaptation isn't always important, since some variable and double stars don't require it. It depends on what you're observing. I actually still prefer the stars in the original Uranometria. They're plotted darker for better representation through the eyepiece.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Starman1
Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)
*****

Reged: 06/24/03

Loc: Los Angeles
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: Daniel Mounsey]
      #5535275 - 11/23/12 11:19 AM

Daniel,
I used a laptop in the field for 5 years. I used red mode in the program, turned the screen way down, and used both a piece of red plexiglass and smoke plexiglass in front of the screen.
By the time I had the screen brightness low enough I didn't notice any modification of my night vision, it was too dark to read.
Maybe my eyes are just sensitive to direct light?
But I think it's about total photons. I removed one of the two LEDs from my Celestron red LED flashlight, and I find it annoyingly bright even when turned down all the way. Yet, I haven't found a dimmer light.
Many people find the resolution of their eye gets really poor under low light. I agree with that, but I prefer to use a stronger pair of glasses instead of a brighter light.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
faackanders2
Carpal Tunnel


Reged: 03/28/11

Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: Rich (RLTYS)]
      #5535768 - 11/23/12 03:48 PM

Quote:

The new atlas looks quite interesting. I like the detailed charts of selected areas of the sky. I have the two volumes of the origional Uranometria 2000.

Rich (RLTYS)




+2 same here. I do like the close up appendix maps.

Will not likely buy the combined version since I now also have the Mag 12 "Great Atlas of the Sky".


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Kevin_C
newbie


Reged: 01/21/12

Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: faackanders2]
      #5536687 - 11/24/12 06:41 AM

Was going to order, but then found out the postage cost to the UK !! :-O (about the cost of the book!)
I hope this will be available in the UK.

Edited by Kevin_C (11/24/12 06:42 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
faackanders2
Carpal Tunnel


Reged: 03/28/11

Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: Kevin_C]
      #5537699 - 11/24/12 07:04 PM

Quote:

Was going to order, but then found out the postage cost to the UK !! :-O (about the cost of the book!)
I hope this will be available in the UK.




Great Atlas of the sky had o shiping cost but took over a month to get from Poland (book rate? or included in cost), and was much heavier than a single volume of Uranometria.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
fred1871
scholastic sledgehammer


Reged: 03/22/09

Loc: Australia
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: faackanders2]
      #5537785 - 11/24/12 08:16 PM

Yes, postage cost for a single item from Will-Bell is big for those of us overseas. A few years back I found the postage was not too bad if you ordered several volumes at once - cost per item was helpfully lower, as postage didn't rise at the same rate as the number of items. Of course you might only want the one item.

The two-in-one appears to simply be a reprint of the former 2-volume 2nd edition - is this so? Though the sample page on-line has better star reproduction than my copy of 2nd edition, southern volume. In that, I found the stars were printed too small for use at night with a dim red light. So I didn't buy the northern volume.

I still have my copy of the 1st edition, both north and south, and use it often. Although the 2nd edition has the better arrangement of chart order, better find-the-constellation charts, etc, the 1st edition has more stars and they're not overwhelmed by hordes of faint galaxies. I'm sure the latter are desired by those with 20-inch Dobs and similar, but not all of us observe that way. So for those of us with more modest scopes and who aren't after the faintest galaxies, the first edition, despite its faults, can be more useful.

These days I supplement it with the Tri-Atlas, an excellent work - and print off enlarged sections of C charts if needed. A very nice supplement to Uranometria 1st-ed for a C9.25 and for chasing down star clusters and doubles and the not-too-dim fuzzies.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
faackanders2
Carpal Tunnel


Reged: 03/28/11

Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: fred1871]
      #5538839 - 11/25/12 02:25 PM

Wonder why they don't offer book shipping rates which are cheaper for the same weight.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Michael Rapp
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 04/27/04

Loc: Dickinson, TX
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: faackanders2]
      #5539545 - 11/25/12 10:36 PM

I'm flipping through my two volumes of Uranometria and wondering if I should upgrade. I have the 1998 reprinting of the 1988 work. (It's actually very special to me...while I know he didn't write it, I got Stephen James O'Meara to sign it at TSP 1999.)

Comparing my equivalent chart of the Orion area to the one at http://www.willbell.com/u2k/index.htm, I notice a few differences. Obviously, I notice a lot more stars. I also notice some corrections in star positions.

If my memory serves me right, the original Uranometria 2000.0 was done with the RNGC catalog. Isn't this the one with a good deal of errors? Is this later version of Uranometria using any updated database of non-stellar objects?

For $60, it would be nice to have a single volume. I just hope it is bound as nicely as the ones that I currently have.

Uranometria is my favorite atlas in the field. It's the only one that has worked well for my navigating the galaxies in Virgo. (I just wish I had bought it earlier. The right atlas is everything! I struggled with Sky Atlas 2000 for years. The scale is good, but it just doesn't good deep enough on the stars.)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
fred1871
scholastic sledgehammer


Reged: 03/22/09

Loc: Australia
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: Michael Rapp]
      #5539755 - 11/26/12 02:26 AM

Michael, if the first edition Uranometria is your favourite atlas in the field you might find, as I did, that the second edition does not work as well because the fainter stars plotted in the 2nd edition are such tiny specks. Not great for red light under the stars.

The 2nd edition did use much better data bases than the first. The RNGC is my all-time winner in the bad catalogs competition. And the 2nd edition improved the star data by using Hipparcos and Tycho. But the cost was a loss of over 50,000 stars in the new edition - far fewer.

However many many more deep sky objects were plotted - 1st edition, 10,300 in total - 2nd edition, nearly 26,000 galaxies before you add in other types of object. The result is galaxy overkill relative to the number of stars plotted, and the lesser number easily seen in the field. A disappointing mismatch. If you struggled with Sky Atlas 2000 because of not enough stars, you'll have the same problem with 2nd edition Uranometria.

My personal preference would've been a 3rd edition, with more stars, larger dots for the fainter ones, and fewer galaxies. YMMV.

Maybe something like the Millenium Star Atlas but with more deep-sky objects than it had would've been a good move? I can't see that happening, so the Great Atlas of the Sky or the Tri-Atlas (pooter or printed out C charts) are good alternatives.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
VanJan
sage
*****

Reged: 07/09/08

Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: fred1871]
      #5539784 - 11/26/12 03:33 AM

Quote:

The RNGC is my all-time winner in the bad catalogs competition.


+1

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Tony Flanders
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 05/18/06

Loc: Cambridge, MA, USA
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: fred1871]
      #5539933 - 11/26/12 08:37 AM

Quote:

The second edition does not work as well because the fainter stars plotted in the 2nd edition are such tiny specks. Not great for red light under the stars.




Good point. I hadn't really noticed that consciously. But even for me, who can view a page 4 inches away due to myopia, the smallest dots are really pushing the limits of visibility.

Quote:

My personal preference would've been a 3rd edition, with more stars, larger dots for the fainter ones, and fewer galaxies.




I don't think it's possible to squeeze in significantly more stars at this scale. If you look at a dense part of the sky, like the Cygnus Star Cloud, you'll see that there's barely room to squeeze in the labels even as things stand.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Dave Ittner
sage
*****

Reged: 05/29/12

Loc: SF Bay Area, California
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: Tony Flanders]
      #5540036 - 11/26/12 10:35 AM

So is this new combined books considered the "3rd Edition"? or has there been 3 editions of the 2 part series?

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Starman1
Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)
*****

Reged: 06/24/03

Loc: Los Angeles
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: fred1871]
      #5540101 - 11/26/12 11:03 AM

Quote:

Michael, if the first edition Uranometria is your favourite atlas in the field you might find, as I did, that the second edition does not work as well because the fainter stars plotted in the 2nd edition are such tiny specks. Not great for red light under the stars.



Well, if you make the faintest stars larger, the brightest ones get larger, too, and having 1/2" dots for the brightest stars wouldn't make sense.
Quote:


The 2nd edition did use much better data bases than the first. The RNGC is my all-time winner in the bad catalogs competition. And the 2nd edition improved the star data by using Hipparcos and Tycho. But the cost was a loss of over 50,000 stars in the new edition - far fewer.




The explanation I read was that stars whose positions weren't accurate were dropped and some were dropped in crowded areas to make the charts more readable. I use the charts all the time, and haven't found the reduced number of stars is really a problem.

Quote:


However many many more deep sky objects were plotted - 1st edition, 10,300 in total - 2nd edition, nearly 26,000 galaxies before you add in other types of object. The result is galaxy overkill relative to the number of stars plotted, and the lesser number easily seen in the field. A disappointing mismatch. If you struggled with Sky Atlas 2000 because of not enough stars, you'll have the same problem with 2nd edition Uranometria.




I observe with a 12.5", and constantly found myself, with the 1st Edition, in the guide to identify galaxies I could see in the field of the target. With the 2nd Edition, the over 30,000 DSOs is, I find, nearly perfect for the 12.5" size in terms of identifying objects in the field.

Quote:


My personal preference would've been a 3rd edition, with more stars, larger dots for the fainter ones, and fewer galaxies. YMMV.




Such as, for example, the MSA, with more stars and 1/3 the DSOs. I would have found that as worthless as I found the MSA.

Quote:


Maybe something like the Millenium Star Atlas but with more deep-sky objects than it had would've been a good move?




Now that would be a capital idea. There was going to be a SkyGX atlas, in 6 volumes, with enough DSOs for 20" scopes, and many many more stars. Chris Watson couldn't find a publisher. I guess too few people want a printed atlas that complete when just about any computer atlas can go as deep or shallow as desired.

Quote:


I can't see that happening, so the Great Atlas of the Sky or the Tri-Atlas (computer or printed out C charts) are good alternatives.




The "C" atlas of that 3-atlas series is a good example of having pages too crowded. I find the DSO labels very hard to read in Milky Way areas, and the scale too small for how deep it goes. I would find it better if printed to 17" x 22" sized pages, but then it would be hard to use at the scope.
I also printed Taki's Mag.8.5 atlas--it's easier to read an atlas in the field with 146 charts than one with 571.

I now truly understand the dilemma every chart maker encounters: how to include enough DSOs for the users of larger scopes and have enough stars at the same time to satisfy those who use the charts for finding objects as well as merely identifying objects in the field.

Thus, the advantage of computer atlases:
1) They can be printed at any scale desired, with any star magnitude cut-off desired. If you want 1-degree-per-page scale with stars to past magnitude 16, you can do that with computer programs. No one would ever do that in a printed atlas.
2) They are much easier to update when organizations like the NGCICProject.org or astronomers like Archinal & Hynes (their seminal work on star clusters) or Hynes' work on planetary nebulae come along. Or when new objects are discovered.
3) They are easier to use to find objects and see the data on those objects. With Uranometria, for example, it takes a bit to find the data on an object you see on the chart
4) It is easier to have the star sizes change with scale when you zoom in or out. This can go a long way toward making a crowded chart less crowded as you zoom out, for example.
5) You can easily change from desk chart mode to field mode with a click of a button.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
fred1871
scholastic sledgehammer


Reged: 03/22/09

Loc: Australia
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: Starman1]
      #5540771 - 11/26/12 06:24 PM

A detailed and thoughtful response, Don - though I think some of our differences are simply preferences on how to use atlases for observing.

I will however suggest that "if you make the faintest stars larger, the brightest ones get larger too..." isn't right - it depends on how you scale the dots relative to magnitude. It's possible to use different scaling procedures so the faintest stars are not so small on the page. For me, the reduced number of stars overall, and the smallest dots for faint stars, creates a very large reduction in the number of faint stars. My eyesight is good, but with a dim red light I can't easily see the fainter stars even with reading glasses on. That's not the case with the 1st edition. That's me, but I suspect that experience is not unique.

You're obviously keener on faint galaxies than I am. We make our choices... Which is probably why I currently have a C9.25 instead of a large Dob; and in the past had a 10" Newtonian, not a 16" or 20". I can see plenty of galaxies at those apertures, but I don't feel a need to chase thousands more through 15th magnitude or whatever the rough limit of Uranometria 2 is. I know personally some highly skilled observers who do. Whatever floats your boat.

So that's a preference, not a rule for everyone. I observe moon, planets, star clusters, doubles, planetary nebulae - and the brighter emission nebulae, a few reflection and dark ones, and the brighter galaxies (say to 12th magnitude or so). The fainter galaxies don't do much for me. I know for some other folk they're a major interest.

My comments about the MSA are based on accepting it's not a good choice for deep sky observers. Hence my suggestion on a version of it with a lot more deep sky objects - perhaps as many as Uranometria...
I'd certainly buy that if the price was half reasonable, and if it was not in one huge volume.

Again, printed charts versus computer atlases - I like printed charts better when observing. Some other observers I've spent time with prefer computer atlases. I find I use printed charts under the stars, and computer atlases in the study. That's merely a preference.

Regarding the Tri-Atlas, I fairly often print off a section of a 'C' chart on an A4 sheet, a manageable size of paper, and it gives a good scale as I can choose the scale (200% or 300% or 400%)to match the sky area density etc. In some ways the 'C' charts are near ideal for me - they go deep enough on stars, have a good showing of deep sky objects, and my only serious quibble would be dot-size scaling where I think the dot sizes can be a little large with mid-magnitude stars in crowded areas. But I don't find it a killer. Overall, this is my preferred atlas for doubles, clusters and general deep sky when I want an atlas that goes reasonably deep. For a mid-level atlas under the stars I still use Uranometria 1st edition some of the time. Like many observers I use a number of atlases, according to what seems a "best fit" for what I'm doing.

Your list of advantages of computer atlases is a good summary and has nothing I'd disagree with in terms of scale choices, update ability, having data available, etc. Which I guess is why I use the Tri-Atlas 'C' charts - but print them off for field use. I like paper better than screens when under the stars, but that's me. I've also had Megastar for some years, but again found I mostly used it in the study.

Conclusion? We all make our choices according to what works for us. Rather like deciding what telescope to get, or what types of objects appeal most to us for observing. These days we have more atlases, aids, and equipment on offer than in the past, which is great.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Starman1
Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)
*****

Reged: 06/24/03

Loc: Los Angeles
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: fred1871]
      #5540897 - 11/26/12 07:44 PM

I wasn't good at stating what I thought I was implying.

I, too, prefer using printed atlases in the field. But if you are going to print some sample pages to take with you to the field, printing samples of Tri-Atlas C is no different, I was trying to imply, than printing samples of a computer program's charts (like Megastar), except with less personal tailoring options with the Tri-Atlas.

With the computer program, you set the chart limits, and scale. You could print the entire constellation of Cassiopeia with just the star clusters. Or you could print a 2 degree by 2 degree chart of Abell 426 with galaxies to magnitude 25.
You have whatever option you choose, to produce however crowded a page you want.
Which is how you're treating the TriAtlas C by blowing it up and printing sections.
But the TriAtlas is much lighter on DSOs than any of the modern computer programs.
The price is right, though, I must admit.

But if I'm to print a chart for use in the field (that is not already in a book), my choice would be to start with something that allows me to control the labels, colors, and depth, and even grid size--something simply blowing up the TriAtlas C doesn't allow.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Rick Woods
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 01/27/05

Loc: Inner Solar System
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: Starman1]
      #5540912 - 11/26/12 07:53 PM

Quote:

Quote:


Maybe something like the Millenium Star Atlas but with more deep-sky objects than it had would've been a good move?




Now that would be a capital idea. There was going to be a SkyGX atlas, in 6 volumes, with enough DSOs for 20" scopes, and many many more stars. Chris Watson couldn't find a publisher. I guess too few people want a printed atlas that complete when just about any computer atlas can go as deep or shallow as desired.




Everyone seems to keep forgetting the Great Atlas of the Sky. It meets all the criteria, and it's still available for $99. (I think.)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
LivingNDixie
TSP Chowhound
*****

Reged: 04/23/03

Loc: Trussville, AL
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: Rick Woods]
      #5541044 - 11/26/12 09:03 PM

Don... any idea when you should get the copy you ordered?

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Starman1
Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)
*****

Reged: 06/24/03

Loc: Los Angeles
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: LivingNDixie]
      #5541797 - 11/27/12 10:23 AM

I received it yesterday.
1) It's thinner than I thought it would be.
2) The 22 page star atlases in the front of each of the separate volumes are gone.
3) The index tabs at the edges of the pages are gone!!
4) The Common Names list is no larger than before.
5) The transparent overlays are gone!!!!!!!

Essentially, it's the same. If any refinement of positions took place, it isn't mentioned. The only thing I'll really miss is the Edge-of-Page tabs.

It's definitely more cost effective that getting the 2-volume set.
But no tabs? No transparencies?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Rick Woods
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 01/27/05

Loc: Inner Solar System
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: Starman1]
      #5541960 - 11/27/12 11:53 AM

Hmmm. Since I already have the 2-volume set, maybe I'll give this one a miss. Doesn't particularly sound like it has anything to recommend it as an addition.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
LivingNDixie
TSP Chowhound
*****

Reged: 04/23/03

Loc: Trussville, AL
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: Starman1]
      #5541988 - 11/27/12 12:08 PM

Quote:

I received it yesterday.
1) It's thinner than I thought it would be.
2) The 22 page star atlases in the front of each of the separate volumes are gone.
3) The index tabs at the edges of the pages are gone!!
4) The Common Names list is no larger than before.
5) The transparent overlays are gone!!!!!!!

Essentially, it's the same. If any refinement of positions took place, it isn't mentioned. The only thing I'll really miss is the Edge-of-Page tabs.

It's definitely more cost effective that getting the 2-volume set.
But no tabs? No transparencies?




Interesting... I wonder if they are going to discontinue the 2-volume set to save on cost. I may still go for this book since I only have the PSA and the free Mag 7 atlas by Andrew L. Johnson on my computer.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
okieav8rAdministrator
I'd rather be flying!
*****

Reged: 03/01/09

Loc: Oklahoma!
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: Starman1]
      #5542002 - 11/27/12 12:16 PM

Quote:

I received it yesterday.
1) It's thinner than I thought it would be.
2) The 22 page star atlases in the front of each of the separate volumes are gone.
3) The index tabs at the edges of the pages are gone!!
4) The Common Names list is no larger than before.
5) The transparent overlays are gone!!!!!!!

Essentially, it's the same. If any refinement of positions took place, it isn't mentioned. The only thing I'll really miss is the Edge-of-Page tabs.

It's definitely more cost effective that getting the 2-volume set.
But no tabs? No transparencies?




The plastic overlays are now a separate $14.95 purchase on the Will-Bell website. I think they shot themselves in the foot on this one.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
LivingNDixie
TSP Chowhound
*****

Reged: 04/23/03

Loc: Trussville, AL
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: okieav8r]
      #5542013 - 11/27/12 12:20 PM

What do these plastic overlays do? Are they like the Sky Atlas 2000 overlays?

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Starman1
Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)
*****

Reged: 06/24/03

Loc: Los Angeles
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: okieav8r]
      #5542021 - 11/27/12 12:24 PM

I just checked--the transparent overlays in the 2nd Edition work perfectly in the 1-volume atlas.
So someone who owns Edition 2 can choose to take eaither set to the field.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Michael Rapp
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 04/27/04

Loc: Dickinson, TX
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: Starman1]
      #5542039 - 11/27/12 12:37 PM

Don,

Index tabs? As in pieces that physically stick out from the rest of the pages?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Starman1
Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)
*****

Reged: 06/24/03

Loc: Los Angeles
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: Michael Rapp]
      #5542169 - 11/27/12 01:44 PM

Quote:

Don,

Index tabs? As in pieces that physically stick out from the rest of the pages?



No. The 2nd Edition has declination "groups" printed on the edges of the pages such that when you look at the edge of the book, you see a cascading series of grey blocks down the outside.
When you become familiar with the atlas, you can find a "ring" of equal declination charts by selecting a certain "tab" on the edge of the pages.
In a dictionary, those index tabs are inset; cut into the pages. In this case, they are simply grey "blocks" that appear on the edges of the pages.
But they are not there in the 1-volume atlas. It may be because they would have to be smaller to have a cascading series that covers the entire sky. In the 2-volume set, the tabs only cover a little more than 50% of the sky.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
mayidunk
Don't Ask...
*****

Reged: 02/17/10

Loc: Betwixt & Between...
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: Starman1]
      #5542508 - 11/27/12 05:18 PM

I was fortunate to recently purchase the three volume, first edition set for about what the new one volume set is going for. At first I was hesitant, but now I'm glad I was able to get them! I have a feeling that the value of the first edition set is about to increase significantly! I'm not sure if the overlays were included with the first edition, but if not, perhaps the set they're now selling will work with it.

In any event, it's appalling how they seemed to have gutted the new version of Uranometria in what may be an attempt to save money. I'd also be interested to know if the binding they used in this new version is still of decent quality.

Another appalling situation is how good star atlases are quickly going out of print, only being available on the used market, where their prices are outrageously inflated! Even the recently compiled Hipparcos charts are now only available as pdf downloads, except for the three volumes that comprised the New Millennium Star Atlas!

I'll tell you, I'm very glad to have gotten the Uranometria set, as well as "The Great Atlas of the Sky," as it's likely that these are the last of their kind!

Yeah, software may be filling in the blanks, but good books like these are truly priceless, IMO!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Starman1
Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)
*****

Reged: 06/24/03

Loc: Los Angeles
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: mayidunk]
      #5542630 - 11/27/12 06:57 PM

It appears to be just as well-bound, in signatures.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
deepskytraveler
super member
*****

Reged: 12/25/05

Loc: Worthington, OH
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: LivingNDixie]
      #5542668 - 11/27/12 07:20 PM

Quote:

Interesting... I wonder if they are going to discontinue the 2-volume set to save on cost.




The 2-volume set had been listed as out of stock for several months on their web site. In fact it was when I last went to check if they were back in stock that I found this new All Sky Edition for sale. No mention of the 2-volume set, so it is fairly safe to assume it has been discontinued.

-Mark


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
LivingNDixie
TSP Chowhound
*****

Reged: 04/23/03

Loc: Trussville, AL
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: deepskytraveler]
      #5542874 - 11/27/12 09:34 PM

You have to feel for the publisher. How many of these atlases could they possibly sell?

One thing I noticed when scanning through some Deep Sky Magazines that I got recently was how many titles that William-Bell had in the 1980s compared to today.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
mayidunk
Don't Ask...
*****

Reged: 02/17/10

Loc: Betwixt & Between...
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: LivingNDixie]
      #5545770 - 11/29/12 04:03 PM

Yeah, it is unfortunate that books seem to be going the way of the dinosaur! You can't really blame the publishers, though. It seems to me that many reference books were kept in print for long periods of time, even though their audience may have been very sparse. However, that may just be a misapprehension on my part. In any event, with the economy as it is, along with the push to preserve paper, as well as people increasingly using e-book readers, and other electronic media, it's a wonder some of these specialty publishers like Willman-Bell are still in existence! I guess progress marches on, though it's sad to see it happen in this case.

On the other hand, I got my copies of the first edition of Uranometria today! They are the third and sixth printings, so I believe that any addenda up to 1993 have been included. However, I'm curious... with all the addenda that was provided with the first edition, just how inaccurate is it really? Is it just a few objects here and there that were out of place (seemingly the case, looking at the addenda listed in the back of the DSFG), or were the errors so significant that some people felt it appropriate to go with another atlas over Uranometria?

Edited by mayidunk (11/29/12 04:06 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
fred1871
scholastic sledgehammer


Reged: 03/22/09

Loc: Australia
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: mayidunk]
      #5545987 - 11/29/12 06:37 PM

Books gone the way of the dinosaur? - Not entirely. Some of us still prefer books for some purposes, including atlases.

Preserving paper? - stop printing fiction bestsellers and release them as e-books. Plus a small print run of hardcovers for libraries. Newspapers are saving paper by having to live with reduced circulations - that's a big paper saving, as is online news.

Anyway - about the accuracy of 1st edition Uranometria - the magnitudes were sometimes a bit off due to old sources, some of them photographic not visual. So the Hipparcos/Tycho magnitudes are better, especially for fainter stars.

A lot of folk didn't like the order of the maps in RA - reversed in the 2nd edition to fit with the common preference. And the use of the RNGC was not a good idea, though it was supplemented with other catalogs.

I've found the 1st edition useful. And accurate enough most of the time, but as I mentioned earlier I don't chase very faint galaxies, the biggest gain in my view for the 2nd edition. More faint galaxies than you can see in a lifetime.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
mayidunk
Don't Ask...
*****

Reged: 02/17/10

Loc: Betwixt & Between...
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: fred1871]
      #5546225 - 11/29/12 08:49 PM

Unfortunately, what some of us prefer, and how we think we can affect that, usually has no relation to reality.

According to what I've read, everyone involved with the Uranometria effort went to great lengths to make corrections in the first edition through 1993. Apparently, the reason they used the RNGC was because it was already computerized at the time, which meant they could generate the charts much quicker using computers and plotters, instead of hand drawing them as they had first considered. I think they knew they were using less than perfect data up front, but counted on overcoming it by making corrections along the way, and incorporating addenda they received from the field.

Whatever the case, I'm glad I got them, I'm enjoying reading "Uranography Yesterday and Today," and I'm pretty sure the charts will be more than adequate to my needs.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
DavidNealMinnick
sage
*****

Reged: 03/06/06

Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: Dave Ittner]
      #5554881 - 12/04/12 11:58 PM

Quote:

So is this new combined books considered the "3rd Edition"? or has there been 3 editions of the 2 part series?




2nd English Edition
1st Printing, All Sky Edition, Oct '12


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
DavidNealMinnick
sage
*****

Reged: 03/06/06

Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: okieav8r]
      #5554887 - 12/05/12 12:02 AM

Quote:


The plastic overlays are now a separate $14.95 purchase on the Will-Bell website. I think they shot themselves in the foot on this one.




Not only are they not included, but, there is no sleeve on the inside back cover in which to store them, as on my 2nd edition, 1st printing (Oct.'01).


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Starman1
Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)
*****

Reged: 06/24/03

Loc: Los Angeles
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: DavidNealMinnick]
      #5555440 - 12/05/12 10:36 AM

Quote:

Quote:


The plastic overlays are now a separate $14.95 purchase on the Will-Bell website. I think they shot themselves in the foot on this one.




Not only are they not included, but, there is no sleeve on the inside back cover in which to store them, as on my 2nd edition, 1st printing (Oct.'01).



I put the transparent overlays in a small mailing envelope for that size and store the envelope inside the cover. It protects the transparencies and doesn't slide out of the book easily.
Even though prior editions had the pocket in the cover to hold the transparencies, I never used the pocket because it kinked the edge of the transparency in my copy.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Rick Woods
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 01/27/05

Loc: Inner Solar System
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: Starman1]
      #5555597 - 12/05/12 12:33 PM

Put the transparancies in plastic page protectors. Then you can use them without exposing them them. I have a 3-ring notebook with the transparancies in page protectors for both U2K editions plus the MSA.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
turtle86
Pooh-Bah Everywhere Else
*****

Reged: 10/09/06

Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: Starman1]
      #5557142 - 12/06/12 09:35 AM

Quote:

I received it yesterday.
1) It's thinner than I thought it would be.
2) The 22 page star atlases in the front of each of the separate volumes are gone.
3) The index tabs at the edges of the pages are gone!!
4) The Common Names list is no larger than before.
5) The transparent overlays are gone!!!!!!!

Essentially, it's the same. If any refinement of positions took place, it isn't mentioned. The only thing I'll really miss is the Edge-of-Page tabs.

It's definitely more cost effective that getting the 2-volume set.
But no tabs? No transparencies?




I wish they had kept the tabs and the 22 page atlas at the front. The one volume all-sky version is really more cost effective only if you don't care about the overlays, which are now $15 a la carte. IIRC, the two volumes with overlays included were $100 total; now, the one volume all-sky version plus overlays totals $85. Personally, I'd rather pay the extra $15 and get the tabs and the 22 page atlas at the front, though unfortunately that's no longer an option.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
HfxObserver
Pooh-Bah
****

Reged: 11/12/04

Loc: Regina, SK, Canada
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: turtle86]
      #5561751 - 12/09/12 12:29 AM

My UA2000,0 all sky Ed. arrived this week.

I'm not a fan of the overlays and appreciate the new text, definitely worth having such detail in the field, a snowfield at present awaiting clearer sky and cooler temps..

It's a good sized book, little larger than NSOG or Star Clusters but not that heavy. Pages are a nice heavy pile.

-Chris


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Daniel Mounsey
Vendor (Woodland Hills)
*****

Reged: 06/12/02

Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: Starman1]
      #5565269 - 12/11/12 12:56 AM

BTW Don,

It no longer bothers me that the 1st edition pages are structured more difficult than the 2nd edition. Uranometria isn't really the kind of atlas you flip from page to page anyway. It's really about opening a page and observing each target in detail in my opinion. Is that what you're doing Don?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
mayidunk
Don't Ask...
*****

Reged: 02/17/10

Loc: Betwixt & Between...
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: Daniel Mounsey]
      #5565804 - 12/11/12 11:55 AM

While the way that the charts connect with each other in Ver. 1 seems counter intuitive at first, it doesn't take long to get the hang of it once you see it. That's been my experience, anyway.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Starman1
Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)
*****

Reged: 06/24/03

Loc: Los Angeles
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: Daniel Mounsey]
      #5565810 - 12/11/12 11:59 AM

I'm looking for a galaxy I haven't seen before, but is in my list "To Be Observed".
I use my DSC to dial in the location.
I see a field of 7 galaxies.
Which is my target? Let me look in U2000 to see...
Hmmm. It's 41 degrees north and about here in RA, flip, flip, flip.
Ah, there's the page.
Now, let me see....
Ah there's the group of galaxies I see. Ah, my target is the one on the right.
Let me get my note pages......

The ability to find the object quickly in the charts is paramount. Having one volume instead of two is great, but I will miss the declination tabs because I used them all the time.

So I don't systematically view every object on a page. I view objects from a pre-planned script. Uranometria helps me identify the target when it's in a crowded field, which seems to be happening more and more as the targets I seek get fainter.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Daniel Mounsey
Vendor (Woodland Hills)
*****

Reged: 06/12/02

Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: Starman1]
      #5566676 - 12/11/12 10:26 PM

It's interesting you turn the pages that way Don. Heck, deep sky observing is an intense and sensational experience. My night is already plotted when using Uranometria in fact if I'm turning a page, I already know which page I'm turning it to with stick notes. I don't even have to think about it. I thought you had that planned.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Starman1
Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)
*****

Reged: 06/24/03

Loc: Los Angeles
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: Daniel Mounsey]
      #5566889 - 12/12/12 01:21 AM

I only use it for ID on about 1 in 50 objects, Daniel.
It's only used when I'm in really crowded fields.
Otherwise, the DSC is accurate enough.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Daniel Mounsey
Vendor (Woodland Hills)
*****

Reged: 06/12/02

Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: Starman1]
      #5568360 - 12/12/12 09:58 PM

It's time to plan!

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Sarkikos
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 12/18/07

Loc: Scotophobia, Maryland, USA
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: deepskytraveler]
      #5570375 - 12/14/12 06:52 AM

I wouldn't buy the new edition of Uranometria 2000. I have some old editions that I bought used for cheap. I cut them up and put them in clear covers, and divided them into a half-dozen binders. That's much more convenient and comfortable than one single, large and heavy atlas. I don't put an atlas on a table or leave it in the van. It has to be right there with me at the eyepiece.

But I'm done buying hard copy star atlases. I have Sky Safari Pro on an Android tablet. The only thing that my U2K binders display that SSP doesn't very well are the dark nebulae. SSP shows the DN as various sized boxes, while U2k displays them with discrete boundaries. If SSP were to start showing DN more naturalistically like U2k does, then I'd never take U2k to the dark site again.

I'm not buying any more hard copy atlases! During the last half-dozen trips to my dark site, I never even looked at a printed atlas. Stick a fork in them. They are done!

Mike


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Sarkikos
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 12/18/07

Loc: Scotophobia, Maryland, USA
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: Starman1]
      #5570383 - 12/14/12 07:03 AM

Don,

Quote:

I still find that the direct light of a smartphone, tablet, or laptop is FAR more injurious to my night vision than the indirect light of a dim red LED flashlight on a printed page. Of course, that's not without difficulties, either, but it's a matter of degree.

In the event you are at a place where full dark adaptation is not possible, or the targets being viewed don't require it, then pretty much anything goes.

The proliferation of phones, tablets, and laptops at dark sky sites, though, is becoming quite annoying.




Yes, many observers do not set the tablets dim enough or they use the wrong kind of red filter. Any filter - such as AstroGizmo or Red Eyes - which lets colors other than red through, is not good enough. I set my tablet on night vision mode, turn it down low, and put on a sheet of Rubylinth AND a sheet of AstroGizmo (the AstroGizmo adheres better to the tablet screen than does Rubylinth). That is dim indeed! Set like this, my tablet is no brighter - I think it's actually dimmer - than a dim red light shining on a printed page. It can be done.

A good electronic atlas is much more convenient and adaptable than a printed atlas. I doubt if I'll ever buy another printed atlas.

Mike


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Sarkikos
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 12/18/07

Loc: Scotophobia, Maryland, USA
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: Daniel Mounsey]
      #5570390 - 12/14/12 07:12 AM

Daniel,

RED EYES

Red Eyes doesn't look dark enough. Look at the photo showing Red Eyes filter over the iPad and iPhone. I can still see non-red colors bleeding through! Not too good.

Also read this ad copy from the Red Eyes site:

"Unlike other darker red films, and less transparent Rubylith products, this lighter shade of red is the perfect transparency."

Nope, Red Eyes lets through too much light and too many colors for dark sky observing. It should only show a dim red. IME & IMO, they don't know what they're talking about.

Mike


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Sarkikos
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 12/18/07

Loc: Scotophobia, Maryland, USA
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: Sarkikos]
      #5570408 - 12/14/12 07:26 AM

How do I plan my dark sky sessions? I already have an observing list set up on Sky Safari Pro for each constellation. Each list contains DSO I've never seen before and that are possible to be seen with my 10" Dob. During the night, I use the constellation lists to go through each constellation as it presents itself. Easy sneezy. Best method I've found yet. I can locate and observe 30 or more "new" DSO in a good night ... if I want to.

I don't even use goto or DSCs. I don't need them. I use Sky Safari Pro, a Telrad and a closely-aligned 70mm optical finder.

Mike


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Dave Ittner
sage
*****

Reged: 05/29/12

Loc: SF Bay Area, California
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: Sarkikos]
      #5570566 - 12/14/12 10:05 AM

Quote:

How do I plan my dark sky sessions? I already have an observing list set up on Sky Safari Pro for each constellation. Each list contains DSO I've never seen before and that are possible to be seen with my 10" Dob. During the night, I use the constellation lists to go through each constellation as it presents itself. Easy sneezy. Best method I've found yet. I can locate and observe 30 or more "new" DSO in a good night ... if I want to.

I don't even use goto or DSCs. I don't need them. I use Sky Safari Pro, a Telrad and a closely-aligned 70mm optical finder.

Mike




This makes a lot of sense. Constellation mopping so to speak. I know it can be a bit time consuming to create an observing list but heck that's what cloudy nights are for right?

I love printed atlases - all of them. And will one day have purchased all of them if not most.

But am getting better at using SF Pro on an IPAD at the eyepiece. Once I get the IPAD mounted on a swing arm that is attached to a stalk I will upload a picture. Of course I also plan to hook up a dew heater strip to the IPAD as well.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Sarkikos
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 12/18/07

Loc: Scotophobia, Maryland, USA
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: Dave Ittner]
      #5570783 - 12/14/12 12:32 PM

Dave,

Quote:

This makes a lot of sense. Constellation mopping so to speak. I know it can be a bit time consuming to create an observing list but heck that's what cloudy nights are for right?




I'm always open to trying new methods, but so far this works best for me. I already have a DSO spreadsheet I've put together from various lists, and filtered out all the DSO that are too dim for my 10" Dob. It includes a column that I check off when I've bagged an object. It's a simple matter to sort the list in "Not Seen"/Constellation/NGC/Other Objects order. From this information I create Constellation lists by hand within Sky Safari Pro.

I've recently acquired Astro Planner which can export lists in SSP format. That should make the whole process easier.

IME & IMO, creating a list for each constellation will probably make more sense to many observers than RA order. Most people are visually and verbally oriented, not so much numerically. When I'm at the dark site, the first thing I look for are constellations and bright stars. I'm not thinking about RA or Dec. Now, sorting the objects within a constellation list in RA order might be useful, especially for long constellations such as Hydra.

Mike


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Dave Ittner
sage
*****

Reged: 05/29/12

Loc: SF Bay Area, California
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: Sarkikos]
      #5571052 - 12/14/12 03:43 PM

Astro Planner looks pretty similar to that of Deepsky 2000
http://www.deepsky2000.com/

I had a ton of observations in that software but on a computer that crashed.

Either software package is a great way to create lists that can be exported to SSP but also keep track of what you have observed to date.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Starman1
Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)
*****

Reged: 06/24/03

Loc: Los Angeles
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: Sarkikos]
      #5571066 - 12/14/12 04:02 PM

Quote:

Dave,

Quote:

This makes a lot of sense. Constellation mopping so to speak. I know it can be a bit time consuming to create an observing list but heck that's what cloudy nights are for right?




I'm always open to trying new methods, but so far this works best for me. I already have a DSO spreadsheet I've put together from various lists, and filtered out all the DSO that are too dim for my 10" Dob. It includes a column that I check off when I've bagged an object. It's a simple matter to sort the list in "Not Seen"/Constellation/NGC/Other Objects order. From this information I create Constellation lists by hand within Sky Safari Pro.

I've recently acquired Astro Planner which can export lists in SSP format. That should make the whole process easier.

IME & IMO, creating a list for each constellation will probably make more sense to many observers than RA order. Most people are visually and verbally oriented, not so much numerically. When I'm at the dark site, the first thing I look for are constellations and bright stars. I'm not thinking about RA or Dec. Now, sorting the objects within a constellation list in RA order might be useful, especially for long constellations such as Hydra.

Mike



My big observing list (over 20,000 objects, a lot of which are blank), which always goes to the field with me, is arranged by Constellation>>RA>>Numerical order (often the same as RA).
i start out with a constellation, then view the constellation from west to east to allow for the passage of time while observing.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Starman1
Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)
*****

Reged: 06/24/03

Loc: Los Angeles
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: Starman1]
      #5571069 - 12/14/12 04:04 PM

I'll put in a plug for Deep Sky Planner 6 when it comes to pre-arranging an observing session.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Rick Woods
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 01/27/05

Loc: Inner Solar System
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: Starman1]
      #5571095 - 12/14/12 04:20 PM

It's interesting, the different needs and preferences of different folks at the eyepiece. I have no interest at all in charting software. Paging through a printed atlas, and comparing star fields on a page with those in the eyepiece, is an integral part of the experience for me. I was raised in a very bookish environment, and books are important to me.

I just hope there are enough people who feel as I do that printed atlases will continue to be published, and we'll all continue to be able to get the tools we each prefer!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Daniel Mounsey
Vendor (Woodland Hills)
*****

Reged: 06/12/02

Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: Rick Woods]
      #5571245 - 12/14/12 06:06 PM

I'm with you there Rick. The only thing where I would add mention though is with regard to Uranometria. There's no way I would be shuffling through its pages in the dark. It's much more efficient to simply put stick tabs in the pages you plan to go to rather than trying to shuffle through some RA DEC numbers in the book. That's like trying to do a messier marathon with Uranometria on the fly. You'd go nuts!

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Rick Woods
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 01/27/05

Loc: Inner Solar System
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: Daniel Mounsey]
      #5571838 - 12/15/12 12:28 AM

Quote:

I'm with you there Rick. The only thing where I would add mention though is with regard to Uranometria. There's no way I would be shuffling through its pages in the dark. It's much more efficient to simply put stick tabs in the pages you plan to go to rather than trying to shuffle through some RA DEC numbers in the book. That's like trying to do a messier marathon with Uranometria on the fly. You'd go nuts!




Well, sure, it's much more efficient if you know what you want to look at ahead of time. Unfortunately, I rarely do that, and end up shuffling in the dark. That's why I like SA2000 the best, usually.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Sarkikos
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 12/18/07

Loc: Scotophobia, Maryland, USA
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: Starman1]
      #5573188 - 12/15/12 08:46 PM

Don,

Quote:

My big observing list (over 20,000 objects, a lot of which are blank), which always goes to the field with me, is arranged by Constellation>>RA>>Numerical order (often the same as RA).
i start out with a constellation, then view the constellation from west to east to allow for the passage of time while observing.




My "big" list contains only about 2500 DSO ... brighter skies and smaller aperture. And no double stars, of course. (In any case, are doubles really deep sky objects? Well, maybe deep sky but not dark sky. )

Yep, listing by constellation and then west to east by RA does seem the most practical way to go about it. It's only a bother if you have a long list and want to look up some NGC numbers quickly within that list. But you can always resort a spreadsheet. I wish that SkySafari would let you sort an observing list on-the-fly. I've suggested that to Southern Skies. Maybe in the next upgrade ...

Mike


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Rick Woods
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 01/27/05

Loc: Inner Solar System
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: Rick Woods]
      #5573189 - 12/15/12 08:46 PM

Here's a question: Does the Deep Sky Field Guide still index correctly to the one-volume U2K?

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Sarkikos
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 12/18/07

Loc: Scotophobia, Maryland, USA
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: Rick Woods]
      #5573203 - 12/15/12 08:55 PM

Rick,

Quote:

Paging through a printed atlas, and comparing star fields on a page with those in the eyepiece, is an integral part of the experience for me. I was raised in a very bookish environment, and books are important to me.




I do the same thing with SkySafari on my tablet ... except for the part about paging through. I have nothing against books. The last time I bothered to count them, I had over 4000. That was about five years ago. Lately, though, I have started to give some away. Hardly a day goes by when I don't think about which ones I should let go.

Well, I guess I do have something against books: they take up a lot of space at home and are not so good for star hopping at my dark site.


Mike


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Rick Woods
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 01/27/05

Loc: Inner Solar System
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: Sarkikos]
      #5573519 - 12/16/12 01:33 AM

Well, there's no right and no wrong here. Just preferences.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
desertstars

*****

Reged: 11/05/03

Loc: Tucson, AZ
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: Rick Woods]
      #5573782 - 12/16/12 09:20 AM

Quote:

Well, there's no right and no wrong here. Just preferences.




You know, you just summed up about 95% of the discussions found on Cloudy Nights.

Among other places...


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jeff Morgan
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 09/28/03

Loc: Prescott, AZ
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: Dave Ittner]
      #5574060 - 12/16/12 12:03 PM

Quote:


This makes a lot of sense. Constellation mopping so to speak. I know it can be a bit time consuming to create an observing list but heck that's what cloudy nights are for right?




Actually, it can be kind of quick with Astroplanner. The only issue is keeping the size of the lists to a manageable number. For example, in Ursa Minor there are about 440 DSO's within the (theoretical) range of a 16" scope. (As you might have guessed, most are galaxies towards the limit of that aperture.) And the Washington Double Star catalog adds a comparable number of targets. To keep my lists to a size I like (around 50 targets) here is the Astroplanner procedure:

1) Select the DSO catalogs you're interested in (omit the double stars for now) in the Search Catalogs pop-up.

2) In the search parameters dialog chose the scope you have defined, the constellation, and then give it a declination band or range. For example, declination 84 00 00 to 89 59 59. Expanding or contracting the declination band within the constellation boundaries is the primary way to manage the number of entries on your list. One could also restrict object type, size, or magnitude if a night of pushing theoretical limits doesn't appeal to you. The options in Astroplanner are amazing. After running the search, add the results to your observing list. Astroplanner will ask if want to omit duplicate entries (and the answer is Yes).

3) Go back to the Search Catalogs pop-up and select your desired double star catalogs. The reason I do this as a separate screen is to tightly control the doubles list to the kinds I find most pleasing, the WDS catalog is truly immense and can overwhelm you. And quite frankly, a lot of them don't "look like" doubles. So I specify a separation range (0.5 to 30 arc seconds) and a component magnitude range (A component 10 and B component 12). Note that if I tried to use these limits on a DSO search, lots of targets wouldn't make the cut hence the two search method for a single list.

4) After running that search, add the results to the first search. Omit duplicate entries again.

5) Now sort the combined observing list in a manner that makes sense to you. Since my scope has GOTO capability (or will have if I finish the ServoCat installation this week ) and the focuser is on the left side, I sort by decreasing RA then decreasing DEC. This always keeps the slews small and always moving away from me and the ladder.

6) Export the result to SkySafari.

The result is that I have a number of individual plans per constellation, such as Ursa Minor 1, Ursa Minor 2, etc. ready to go in SkySafari.

And it is indeed enjoyable to do this on a cloudy night with a hot mocha or adult beverage and check the results against Uranometria.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Sarkikos
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 12/18/07

Loc: Scotophobia, Maryland, USA
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: Jeff Morgan]
      #5574114 - 12/16/12 12:49 PM

Jeff,

Thanks for this useful advice about Astoplanner. I've just recently acquired this program and am still learning to set up lists with it.

Another way to limit objects within a constellation list, would be to limit the type of object. I'm thinking about setting up different lists for each constellation based on the best type of objects to observe given a specific night's transparency/seeing conditions.

For instance, it would not make sense to look for faint galaxies or "bright"/dark nebulae on a night that is not very transparent. On those nights, it'd probably be better to be locating and oserving open clusters. That's exactly what I did in practice during my last trip to a dark site. The night was not very transparent, so I limited my searches mostly to open clusters, though I did find some galaxies, too. (21 "new" objects total before the sky clouded over, including 15 OCs and 6 galaxies - no goto or DSCs.)

Mike

Edited by Sarkikos (12/16/12 12:52 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
alintolea
member
*****

Reged: 08/30/07

Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: faackanders2]
      #5658488 - 02/02/13 04:49 PM

In regards to dimmer lights.. I put a piece of masking tape over the lens of the Celestron flashlight. Besides dimming the light to very acceptable levels, it makes it very diffuse, and much more pleasant to use.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
rinalmj
sage
*****

Reged: 11/23/09

Loc: Saxonburg, PA
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: alintolea]
      #5690709 - 02/20/13 11:51 AM

Does anyone have pictures of the new edition that you could share? I've been looking into buying this but pictures on the internet are very scarce.

I'd also be interested to hear general impressions (in addition to those given above) specific to the new edition.

A couple specific concerns that I have are:

1. How does the physical format work? Is the binding good? Does it stay open when you turn to a page? Do the charts fold-out?

2. Given the large volume of information, how crowded do the charts look?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
okieav8rAdministrator
I'd rather be flying!
*****

Reged: 03/01/09

Loc: Oklahoma!
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: rinalmj]
      #5690737 - 02/20/13 12:05 PM

Quote:

Does anyone have pictures of the new edition that you could share? I've been looking into buying this but pictures on the internet are very scarce.

I'd also be interested to hear general impressions (in addition to those given above) specific to the new edition.

A couple specific concerns that I have are:

1. How does the physical format work? Is the binding good? Does it stay open when you turn to a page? Do the charts fold-out?

2. Given the large volume of information, how crowded do the charts look?




This is from the publisher's website. Hope it's what you're looking for.

The bindings in books published by Willman-Bell, at least the ones I've bought, are of excellent quality that will last many years. They make them to endure a lot of use.



Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
rinalmj
sage
*****

Reged: 11/23/09

Loc: Saxonburg, PA
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: okieav8r]
      #5690770 - 02/20/13 12:23 PM

I've seen those, but thanks for the response. I was hoping for some pictures from users that show different views.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Starman1
Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)
*****

Reged: 06/24/03

Loc: Los Angeles
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: rinalmj]
      #5690850 - 02/20/13 01:02 PM

Quote:

Does anyone have pictures of the new edition that you could share? I've been looking into buying this but pictures on the internet are very scarce.

I'd also be interested to hear general impressions (in addition to those given above) specific to the new edition.

A couple specific concerns that I have are:

1. How does the physical format work? Is the binding good? Does it stay open when you turn to a page? Do the charts fold-out?

2. Given the large volume of information, how crowded do the charts look?




The format works fine--the same as the separate volumes.
The binding is heavy paper sewn into signatures and very well-bound.
It stays open when you open to a page, though near either end of the book the pages tend to not lie flat. It helps that the first chart is several pages into the book.
The charts go from left of left page across the binding to right side of right page. They do not fold out.

The charts are surprisingly uncrowded, which is the plus side of the mag. 9.75 limit. There are some large scale charts with stars (in some cases) to mag.15 in the back of the atlas, but if the atlas had been that scale it would have been 4000+ pages.

One criticism leveled at U2000 is that with 30,000+ thousand DSOs, the magnitude stellar limit is not deep enough to allow identification of an individual galaxy in crowded regions, and that is more-or-less true. There may not be any stars within the field of view of the galaxy in your scope that are plotted in U2000. But the alternative is either a lot more crowded pages (see the mag.13 atlas in the "Tri-Atlas" of Torres) or a larger scale, with a correspondingly more-difficult-to-use format.

These days you can always print large scale charts with stars to magnitude 16 from any one of innumerable free computer atlases if you need to identify several faint galaxies in a small area. Though, I've found U2000 adequate in many star-poor areas to identify the arrangement of galaxy groups so that I can make notes about the objects.

The new atlas is less than twice as thick as each of the two volumes in the earlier edition. The Deep Sky Field Guide (orig. Vol.3) still applies to the new printing and so is still a good reference volume for the atlas.
I miss the index tabs for the RA and Dec, but I like the one-volume arrangement.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
cliff mygatt
Carpal Tunnel


Reged: 01/27/09

Loc: Kitsap County, WA
Re: New Edition of Uranometria 2000 new [Re: Starman1]
      #5716029 - 03/06/13 09:22 AM

I just ordered mine and am looking forward to lightening the load of my field library!

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | (show all)


Extra information
0 registered and 6 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  Geo557, kkokkolis 

Print Thread

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is disabled
      UBBCode is enabled


Thread views: 7105

Jump to

CN Forums Home




Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics