Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I place the Millennium Star Atlas far,far above the others for these reasons:

---

Well, hold on just a second. All it is, is a copied version of Uranometria with fainter stars. I mean stop your gushing. If you knew what proceded what, you wouldnt be so wow about Millenium.

Pete

---

Hi, Pete. Thanks for your reasoned response. I happen to have the Uranometria Atlases so I do, in fact, know what preceded what. I also have a few other Wil Tirion Atlases and am completely familiar with the progression of his marvellous work. As for the Millennium being merely a copy of the Uranometria I would say that the Mill is a complete re-thinking of the Urano from the ground up. A patient reading of the preface, foreword etc. of the Millennium will prove this. And for the notation of doublestars it is absolutely NOT a copy. Urano does not indicate separation or P.A. of double stars or the number of components if multiple like the Millennium does - it merely puts a horizontal line through stars to indicate they are not single. Hardly a copy. I will continue to gush.
Clear skies, Dave

--------------------
David Cotterell
14th Floor Observatory
Richmond Hill, Ontario
200 mm Intes f/10 Mak-Cass
80mm WO Zenithstar FD
66mm WO ED
Losmandy G-11 mount with Gemini
Ioptron minitower
Canon XSi

Post Extras