When I suggested to include some examples, I thought to add a paragraph something along these lines.
"Examples of such devices are image intensifier tubes, analog video cameras or digital imaging or photo cameras that display consecutive captures in near real-time using live software or other means."
This is just an example of what I meant by "examples". Please feel free to modify discard or include at your best collective judgment. Doe to other circumstances I will not be able to log in for awhile.
Yep, I totally understand Dom.
Until about 3 years ago the 'Video and Electronically Assisted Astronomy' section's description did include a line similar to what you propose.
The original was however, as many may remember, quite lengthy and the Admin team decided to water it down and removed the part saying: "using devices such as Mallincam, Watec, Stellacam, IEE;s etc".
Then about 2 years ago it was watered down even more and the word 'Video' was removed from the description. It now meant next to nothing.
Then about 6 months ago, due to the rise of arguments inside the forum about what constitutes a 'Live Video Astronomy' camera and an 'Imaging' camera like the Lodestar, the whole section was renamed 'Electronically Assisted Astronomy' to cancel out the debate, but it now failed to really explain what we are about or help people looking for 'Video Astronomy'.
And the new description doesn't really explain what we are about either. Especially for someone looking to learn about this catch phrase 'Video Astronomy' that has started to become popular.
I doubt that Admin will add want to add more to a description when they have already filtered it down shorter twice.
Simplicity is always best.
But as it is, people searching for info about Video Astronomy can't find it easily.
Over at the 'Video Astronomy Forum' we get regular new members, probably because when people search in Google for 'Video Astronomy' that's what comes up.
No matter what technical term you want to give it: Opto, NRTV, Photonics, etc, and no matter how much you want to argue about which one is 'technically' correct, people will still call it 'Video Astronomy' because that has been it's popular name for approximately 30 years and is now it's commonly used modern name on the internet.
Some in here may have to swallow their pride in being technically correct and concede that to get new people in here they need to associate the title or the description easily with 'Video Astronomy', which is what people search for no matter what it's technical name is.
If you were in search of Eyepiece info in Cloudy Nights (or elsewhere), where do you look? 'Eyepieces' of course. But to be technically correct, the true name is an 'Ocular Lens'.
But do we ever go looking for 'Ocular Lenses'? No, we use the common name that people associate with.
I'm sure people are smart enough to understand that cameras like Lodestar, DSI, etc are now commonly used for Video Astronomy.
The term 'Video' doesn't refer to the camera's capability any more. It tends to refer to the branch of Astronomy we do. Whatever camera is used.