113 replies to this topic

[Bob Campbell]

Hi All

 

I was thinking of how to pose this question, and I opted for the direct approach with not a lot of fanfare.

 

 

Recently there are a few EAA practitioners who have upgraded their gear to include guiding and 3 color filter wheels. The use of Jocular makes the filter wheel doable in a sense under EAA rules, since the 'as seen' image evolves as the filtered data is acquired. At the end one saves the last image seen, and that is that.

 

These setups look identical to AP rigs in their expense and complexity. Only difference is 60 min max (thus higher gain than AP) and slightly bloated stars, but that can be handled real time with software.

 

So is this blurring the lines between EAA and AP?

 

It is certainly raising the bar as to the expense...SHO 2" narrowband filters are quite expensive, and even the hardware to get both guiding and filter wheel operation is also not cheap.

 

Do you think this evolution is fair to the majority of EAA folks?

 

EAA I recall was trying to simulate the act of observing objects in a manner similar to an eyepiece. It is a boon (requirement)  to people who live in LP regions.

 

I realize everyone says this is not a competition, but face it, we are all human we DO compare. I would contend my work cannot and will not hold a candle to some of the new images being generated.

 

Not everyone has the resources to throw $$ at something to stay with the 'pack'

 

Quick aside to illustrate what can happen in another area that has some bearing

 

I was lucky enough after grad school to live near one of  the meccas of  1/12 scale RC electric cars (Santa Clara, CA). At the club I went to there were several world champions and more national champions.The weekly races would attract 150 racers in three classes: Novice, Amateur, and Expert.

 

I worked my way up the pecking order to be a pretty decent Amateur, but I never moved to Expert, because to be an Expert you needed factory sponsorship and BIG bucks.

 

The cost made many people leave the hobby, and now if there are any races left, they are a far cry from what they were back then. Basically expense to generate something decent went way up, and the sport shrunk dramatically because people got discouraged.

 

Anyway, comments solicited. Am I full of it, do I have it wrong? Right? Who knows?

 

thanks for participating

 

Bob

Edited by Bob Campbell, 21 September 2023 - 03:48 PM.

[Notdarkenough]

Each person's personal observation tactics are equally valid as any others. I do understand that the EAA Forum must have some demarcation point to separate from AP, and any such point will be arbitrary for some. But so be it. In practice, though? My gear isn't much different from an AP beginner, but I draw the line at post-processing (for now) and time on target. I don't spend much time each night, but I do look for several different targets each night, as opposed to an AP-type spending multiple nights for each target. I think many look at EAA and AP vice the crazy. I think that is a bit simplistic, but for me, it is a much better description. I still don't have a filter wheel, but who cares? That is simply a device. Post-processing and time-on-target are the significant differences in my opinion. 

[SchoolMaster]

We each take our own road to salvation.

 

Time on target (for a single capture) and no off-mount processing are the two biggies.  The 60 minute limit, I think, is more for very faint targets, rather than low Gain long looks at M42.

 

I have bought no kit for the purpose of guiding, but when I want to use long subs  (over 50 secs) in parts of the sky where things are moving fast, simple guiding with one of my secondary OTA give improved results.  I use the FMA180 as an imaging scope and image with my guide camera too.

 

I have a decent number of filters for narrowband and use them on an OSC sometimes.

 

I still think that we EAA practitioners use lighter and cheaper mounts, and many use less 'corrected' OTA. 

 

I have the kit to do AP, but I have ZERO interest in multi-hour captures, sorting out the 'good' subs, and then spending days fine-tuning the result. 

 

I have more money in my cameras (2600OSC, 294MM, 533MM, 294MC + several smaller color and mono cameras) than both my mount or collection of OTA, but I'm assembling a 'Capture every type of target' system, so need diverse parts.

[firemachine69]

I mean, it's not really a competition... So not really comparable. 

 

People were poking at my D300 to start astrophotography. Girlfriend and myself are still enjoying the technical challenges and basic experimenting. 

[columbidae]

Hi All

 

I was thinking of how to pose this question, and I opted for the direct approach with not a lot of fanfare.

 

 

Recently there are a few EAA practitioners who have upgraded their gear to include guiding and 3 color filter wheels. The use of Jocular makes the filter wheel doable in a sense under EAA rules, since the 'as seen' image evolves as the filtered data is acquired. At the end one saves the last image seen, and that is that.

 

These setups look identical to AP rigs in their expense and complexity. Only difference is 60 min max (thus higher gain than AP) and slightly bloated stars, but that can be handled real time with software.

 

So is this blurring the lines between EAA and AP?

 

Always has been....

 

It is certainly raising the bar as to the expense...SHO 2" narrowband filters are quite expensive, and even the hardware to get both guiding and filter wheel operation is also not cheap.

 

Do you think this evolution is fair to the majority of EAA folks?

 

EAA I recall was trying to simulate the act of observing objects in a manner similar to an eyepiece. It is a boon (requirement)  to people who live in LP regions.

 

I realize everyone says this is not a competition, but face it, we are all human we DO compare. I would contend my work cannot and will not hold a candle to some of the new images being generated.

 

Not everyone has the resources to throw $$ at something to stay with the 'pack'

 

Quick aside to illustrate what can happen in another area that has some bearing

 

I was lucky enough after grad school to live near one of  the meccas of  1/12 scale RC electric cars (Santa Clara, CA). At the club I went to there were several world champions and more national champions.The weekly races would attract 150 racers in three classes: Novice, Amateur, and Expert.

 

I worked my way up the pecking order to be a pretty decent Amateur, but I never moved to Expert, because to be an Expert you needed factory sponsorship and BIG bucks.

 

The cost made many people leave the hobby, and now if there are any races left, they are a far cry from what they were back then. Basically expense to generate something decent went way up, and the sport shrunk dramatically because people got discouraged.

 

Anyway, comments solicited. Am I full of it, do I have it wrong? Right? Who knows?

 

thanks for participating

 

Bob

 

It's not a competition.  It's a hobby.  Rebalance everyone's expectations by posting the worst photos, otherwise it really will turn into AP where the first thing people do with a new photo is take a magnifying glass to the corners.  Hobbies are supposed to be fun - don't let tryhards set the pace. 

 

I think the sketching forum actually has this problem a little, where the overall quality discourages beginners/amateurs from posting.

 

But again, my EAA hardliner opinion is that if you save a photo with the intent to share it, you're already tainted by AP concerns.  How do you post a photo without it becoming about the photo instead of your observation or observing session?

[jimhoward999]

I have not heard of anybody who buying equipment to "keep up with the pack"   I am not sure there even is a pack.

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

[Avgvstvs]

I think all of this will be mute in decade or two. The future will laugh at our technological ponderings. There is probably a simple single solution to both EAA & AP. This discussion just anticipates what's ahead. As the newer replaces the old. EAA is new in itself so go figure. What ever your opinion, these are exciting times.

 

On another level I think people would be happier just working with what they have. Rather than dreaming of the ideal setup. Not all of us can afford top of line gear, when the real world of bills and relationships come into play. Too many variables to mention. I think of amateur astronomy of more of a process than an end result. Yes we all love showing our pretty pictures. But few appreciate the process. The trials and errors, equipment lost/forgotten, etc. These become your memories in the end. So be happy with what you have. And try for better.

[Bean614]

It's not a competition.  It's a hobby.  Rebalance everyone's expectations by posting the worst photos, otherwise it really will turn into AP where the first thing people do with a new photo is take a magnifying glass to the corners.  Hobbies are supposed to be fun - don't let tryhards set the pace. 

 

I think the sketching forum actually has this problem a little, where the overall quality discourages beginners/amateurs from posting.

 

But again, my EAA hardliner opinion is that if you save a photo with the intent to share it, you're already tainted by AP concerns.  How do you post a photo without it becoming about the photo instead of your observation 

"But again, my EAA hardliner opinion is that if you save a photo with the intent to share it, you're already tainted by AP concerns.  How do you post a photo without it becoming about the photo instead of your observation or observing session?"

 THIS!^^^^^^^^^^

I've always felt EAA was 'Observatioal', while everything else was 'Photographic' in nature.  The 'older' EAA folks I know are doing it to, essentially,  see on a Monitor or TV, what they can no longer enjoy viewing at the Eyepiece.  The Revolution R-2, or the similar Mallincam version, is what I think of.  Or, with a DSLR, sending the "Live View" to a monitor or TV.

   Neither I, nor my astro-friends enjoying EAA, nor most of the folks asking about EAA on CN, want anything whatsoever to do with computers/laptops, processing,  taking photos  (OH, wait..... that's now called 'data', isn't it?  Makes it sound so much loftier.....).

  We also think you can't get around to observing many objects with 60-minute exposures, especially when we're used to 10 to 30 per session,  depending on what we're looking for.

  Yet, when it is abundantly clear that CN member posting about THIS nearly 'pure' form of EAA, they immediately get replies, from the 'Usual Suspects', extolling AP, or something close to it, and trying to steer them toward new laptops, pricey cameras,  better/expensive mounts, and a slew of Apps they never heard of. 

The OP usually bows out of the discussion about this time, frustrated,  disillusioned,  and discouraged.  And the same Gaggle of AP proponents just continues with their usual banter.

  Yes, 'true' EAA,  for many, MANY of us, can be quite easy and acceptable,  and quite often, most excellent!   And all for well under $1,000. In many cases, the needed equipment is already owned!

   But, this is just one old guy's opinion........

Edited by Bean614, 21 September 2023 - 07:36 PM.

[dcweaver]

Hi Bob -

 

The feeling you expressed is not uncommon in an activity where there are wide ranging skills and resources. People can feel left behind when they don't have the latest, greatest equipment, or skills. In competitive auto racing, rules are routinely made, modified, and challenged to exclude equipment and techniques. This is done to level the playing field so the team with the most money doesn't win every year.

 

But this forum isn't a competitive sport. It's just a place to share experiences and get help. As such, I can't imagine you would want to deny participation to innovative people who want to advance the state-of-the-art. I know I don't, and I can guarantee you that everyone here has better equipment than me. I love watching everyone use that equipment, and apply clever new approaches to do things that are currently out of my reach. Their success makes me feel successful, and it motivates me to learn, so I can do interesting and innovative things later.

 

We all feel pressure to keep up with the Jones', but your contributions and experiences are just as valuable as anyone else's. As the kids say... you do you. I'm sure you can agree, worrying about what someone else is doing is time not well spent.

[ex-Bubblehead]

For me, there is also a bit of wanting to make dealing with hardware to take a little bit of a back seat. My old mount was having issues tracking sometimes, so I started guiding which helped a ton. Then I got a little frustrated with the mount interface, so I went to a better mount. Now that I have a better mount, I got a 9.25 to give me some focal length over my refractor to try and drill into the smaller targets which are underwhelming me with the frac (current project) while also simultaneously grabbing one of the little 180s to "zoom out" and also replace my current guide scope (as noted above), while now finding myself shorthanded on 294/533+ sensor- sized cameras... and oh, by the way, getting sucked in to the convenience of autofocusing...

No intention to get into real meaty AP, but all of my hardware upgrades have made sense to me at the time and I have learned to not second guess myself the morning after...

[Mark Lovik]

I care more about seeing the objects in the sky than trying to impress people.  But I have a relentless issue with doing better with my current hardware.  My attitudes have changed over time.

• originally wanted to do EAA with a minimal system, and use intelligent and planned design to be able to see big scope targets with small and modest hardware (think harder .. not spend more).  My monochrome solution would never impress anybody doing AP, but had reach and was really fast.  It was also very interactive with short EAA times.
  • original plan ... a galaxy scope,  Discovered globulars clusters along the way.
  • I didnt know anything about ARP and galaxy clusters at the time (with help) picked up these views and knowledge quickly.  PS - had help in the EAA forums. Found I despise elliptical galaxies .... boring.
• Then I went to color,  It was pretty ... but took forever to get an image.  Many of my views at the time took longer than our 60 minute limit today.
  • I started feeling like I was going down the AP path .. everything took so long to get good views.
  • Getting pretty color galaxies was where I wandered away from EAA (for a bit)
  • I discovered planetary nebula -- and now had a new set of cool objects in the sky,  Color made a difference in exploring objects in the sky.
• I started spending money going down the color sinkhole.  I wanted back to monochrome viewing habits in color.  This can rapidly become expensive.
  • Wanted better resolution AND make each scope as fast as possible.  See more and get back to a faster EAA time.​
  • I modeled the heck out of new potential systems to get better sky limited resolution and speed.  New obsession - calculate, predict, and plan many times and buy once, It worked and each system matched predicted performance -- what fun!
  • Still my refractor upgrade cost 4x (scope and camera) my original EAA rig,
  • I have purchased a new reducer for my introductory 8" SCT visual rig, Reuse everything else to keep costs down.  So I have tinker toy EAA rigs - each needs to assembled for the night,
  • Now I found out the joy of wider angle targets in the sky.  My first small fov mono views of the Heart and Soul nebula were a joke.  
  • I was back to EAA time for my galaxies.  Funny thing is I am getting AP quality just pushing my EAA techniques -- it's nice .. it's not my goal.
• ​Started to repurpose the original scope as a wide angle rig (almost no cost)
  •  Found real joy looking at galactic targets in the sky.  Getting wide angle views of M24 and sweeping ranges in Cygnus let me see the sky in a new way.
  • This indirectly has led me down the rabbit hole of looking at dark nebula, and researching the astronomical literature on this.  My warped sense of fun!
•  ​I still like simplicity instead of AP complexity - my complexity added moderate cost.  The complexity cost to my EAA observing time was huge,
  • first tried auto-focusers ... ugh I do not them.  Added setup complexity, more junk to assemble and fail in the field, and made my rigs stiff ... different scopes had to be treated differently.​
  • I have now tried guiding -- I can use short subs and loose NO performance.  Looks like this will not be routine for my EAA.  The guide scope is now my widest field scope.
  • Exception - using a NUC computer at the scope.  It has made observing much more enjoyable.  This is true by viewing at the scope, and indoors or in a tent when the weather is uncomfortable.
• Now
  • I don't care about fancy filters - I like the stars in my view and I am not observing is horrible urban areas where these are more compelling.
  • I never intend to go the filter wheel mono camera route ,,, too much work for me and way too much added complexity
  • The range of different objects within reach of my EAA rigs is wonderful.  This is true in a reasonable EAA time.  My interests have expanded as the flexibility of my systems have expanded,
  • I am committed to EAA systems to about 15 pounds or less (scope and camera system).  This allows me to use mid-sized EQ mounts successfully.
  • I like to promote some of my EAA views to show simple systems and moderate cost can perform incredibly well if you plan and optimize things first.  Be smarter using what you have -- and optimize for EAA, not for AP.  Some AP habits and lore are wrong for EAA systems.
  • -----------------------
  • I often get AP level quality using strict EAA and can drop the AP tools I started poking with in the past, Getting obsessive with optimizing scope resolution and speed has allowed me to get results in minutes that poorly optimized AP systems can only match with multi-day exposures, It also helped to avoid wasting my astro dollars.
  • The goal is still what I can see in EAA time (I get impatient)
• I have always been happy with my EAA views (the good and bad).  They have improved drastically - the object is to have fun looking at the sky,
• If I was to restart today .. I would take a different path.  The following takes a bit more effort, but fits on modest mounts, has a huge range of objects that can be viewed, and costs under $1000.  It also handles color EAA within a reasonable EAA time,
  • Quattro 150P Newtonian
  • Start with an ASI585 camera
    
    
    
     

Edited by Mark Lovik, 22 September 2023 - 01:15 AM.

[BrentKnight]

In my case, getting better equipment and more sophisticated accessories has made doing EAA easier for me. I was never happy with the simplicity of the AIR and so went with the more capable (but ultimately more complicated and expensive) PC running Sharpcap. I wasn't happy fighting with my free 8" SCT and so got a much more expensive refractor which works so much better and so much easier. Some of these things I've done might have had a learning curve, and they certainly cost me money, but the end result is I get better results (for me) with less effort.

On the question raised about posting pictures...whenever I can, I post more than just a picture. I'll describe the field, share my observation notes and generally try to make my posts more about the target than the equipment or techniques.

[Bob Campbell]

Thanks for the great discussion and opinions so far. Please keep them coming.

 

Looks like I have/had the wrong mindset going into EAA, based on the majority of opinions expressed so far.

 

There appears to be no urge to compare by the majority, the added features/expense and complexity just make life easier to capture images.

 

OK, makes sense

 

Bob

Edited by Bob Campbell, 21 September 2023 - 09:22 PM.

[amitshesh]

Comparisons are inevitable. But levels of comparisons are different for each.

You gave the example of using filter wheels for eaa. I never even thought about it, but now I am. There is a wide variety of equipment being used for eaa as reported here, corresponding to a wide variety of the amount of motivation for the hobby, and the amount of money that they can spend. Personally I think the horse went out of the barn with expense and equipment when I saw people buying an AM5 and putting a 50-60mm refractor on it. It's very future proof, but it reminds me of Mr Incredible boringly driving a car too small and dainty for him!

That being said, I find a lot of value in reading about what equipment others have and what they do with it. If nothing else, it is a continuous broadening of my horizons about what exists out there. Just the other day mccatskills posted a picture taken by his edge hd telescope of a galaxy cluster. I was surprised, and another poster introduced me to the HCG catalog. And as I type this, I am trying a couple of HCG targets that I would have not known had I not read the post that made a picture using equipment I may never have, under skies that I can only dream of! And it turns out my equipment is capable of showing me these targets, albeit not as well.

Edited by amitshesh, 21 September 2023 - 10:21 PM.

[Bob Campbell]

You gave the example of using filter wheels for eaa. I never even thought about it, but now I am.

 

when I saw people buying an AM5 and putting a 50-60mm refractor on it. It's very future proof, but it reminds me of Mr Incredible boringly driving a car too small and dainty for him!

 Just the other day mccatskills posted a picture taken by his edge hd telescope of a galaxy cluster. I was surprised, and another poster introduced me to the HCG catalog. And as I type this, I am trying a couple of HCG targets that I would have not known had I not read the post that made a picture using equipment I may never have, under skies that I can only dream of! And it turns out my equipment is capable of showing me these targets, albeit not as well.

Sounds like the introduction of more AP like features of others is a benefit to you. AM5 carrying 60mm is certainly overkill.

 

Be aware that to do filter wheel and stay within the confines of EAA rules (if they really matter anymore) requires the mastery of Jocular. Jocular is alpha like software and may require python programming to get it set up.

 

I do like the ability to discover and annotate very obscure objects, and with a cheap goto mount and something like sharpcap (13pounds/yr) can do, essentially at low cost

 

thanks for your comment

 

Bob

[TentacleJoe]

I think the rules set on this forum regarding what constitutes EAA are set for this forum only to keep the post separate from AP but doesn't necessarily mean that is the definition of what EAA is for you outside this forum. Cloudy Nights doesn't own the rights to EAA or is the originator of the process so just do EAA the way you want and take these "rules" that have been set as a guideline of what you can and cannot post here but not necessarily what EAA is defined as in general, which to me is just replacing the eyepiece with a camera and go.

Edited by TentacleJoe, 22 September 2023 - 12:27 AM.

[Bob Campbell]

I think the rules set on this forum regarding what constitutes EAA are set for this forum only to keep the post separate from AP but doesn't necessarily mean that is the definition of what EAA is for you outside this forum. Cloudy Nights doesn't own the rights to EAA or is the originator of the process so just do EAA the way you want and take these "rules" that have been set as a guideline of what you can and cannot post here but not necessarily what EAA is defined as in general, which to me is just replacing the eyepiece with a camera and go.

you make a good point. I was not clear enough that I was referring to criteria to be able to post EAA  images on CN EAA forums.

 

The use of Jocular and filter wheels opens the possibility of really upping the quality of EAA images for those who invest in the considerably more expensive (and AP-like) hardware to make that work. If no one with a lesser setup compares their work with those generated by  AP-lite rigs, then I guess all is well. But in my view, not compare at some level  flies in the face of human nature. (and from what I have read in this thread my view is in the minority)

 

Bob

Edited by Bob Campbell, 22 September 2023 - 12:38 AM.

[Darth Riker]

It's why I've posted the images I have.

It shows, with my gear (C8 SCT, HEQ5 Pro, .63 reducer, ASI294MC Pro, ASIAIR Plus, unguided, manually focussed, uncropped), what I have been able to achieve over time and that I've been happy with each step.

We do need to show what is possible with a range of equipment. It can help people decide their goal for the hobby.

[Bob Campbell]

It's why I've posted the images I have.

It shows, with my gear (C8 SCT, HEQ5 Pro, .63 reducer, ASI294MC Pro, ASIAIR Plus, unguided, manually focussed, uncropped), what I have been able to achieve over time and that I've been happy with each step.

We do need to show what is possible with a range of equipment. It can help people decide their goal for the hobby.

I agree 100%. I have an even more economical setup:

 

either AT80ED(@448mm) or C6(f10 or f6.3)

 

/asi294mc-pro/az-gti(eq)/L-pro or uv-ir/Sharpcap 4.1 into a cheap Lenovo laptop I picked up used.

 

 

It is fun getting attractive results with setup like mine (ours), best not to get too excited if it doesn't match to the AP-lite rig that cost 5x.

 

I guess I'm learning to temper my expectations, and if someone is motivated to do EAA on a similar setup, I should be pleased in some sense.

 

Bob

Edited by Bob Campbell, 22 September 2023 - 01:21 AM.

[Mark Lovik]

It's why I've posted the images I have.

It shows, with my gear (C8 SCT, HEQ5 Pro, .63 reducer, ASI294MC Pro, ASIAIR Plus, unguided, manually focussed, uncropped), what I have been able to achieve over time and that I've been happy with each step.

We do need to show what is possible with a range of equipment. It can help people decide their goal for the hobby.

This is coupled with all the different and wonderful targets in the sky that can be viewed with EAA.

 

Somehow many of my early images taken while learning has been invaluable.

• I can immediately see images where flats were not used on a refractor in moderately light polluted skies.-- been there done that
• I also found out dark sky tricks (like ignoring flats) do not always work in suburban skies.  It took some serious thinking over time (embarrassed to say) to figure the reason for these subtle effects,
• I can see the effects on EAA views that do not use dithering -- I did it for way too long.  Dithering should have been part of my tricks early on in my EAA path.  This was my most recent significant improvement in EAA viewing.

[Bob Campbell]

I have not heard of anybody who buying equipment to "keep up with the pack"   I am not sure there even is a pack.

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

maybe poor choice of words, but if you want to deduce who the pack is consider the more prolific posters on the EAA monthly challenges. I think most EAA nuts love equipment and try to upgrade their rig to achieve a better result. The question here is how much upgrade/expense constitutes morphing over into AP-lite.

 

 

Bob

Edited by Bob Campbell, 22 September 2023 - 01:38 AM.

[Bob Campbell]

 

This is coupled with all the different and wonderful targets in the sky that can be viewed with EAA.

 

Somehow many of my early images taken while learning has been invaluable.

• I can immediately see images where flats were not used on a refractor in moderately light polluted skies.-- been there done that
• I also found out dark sky tricks (like ignoring flats) do not always work in suburban skies.  It took some serious thinking over time (embarrassed to say) to figure the reason for these subtle effects,
• I can see the effects on EAA views that do not use dithering -- I did it for way too long.  Dithering should have been part of my tricks early on in my EAA path.  This was my most recent significant improvement in EAA viewing.

 

best part is these significant improvements cost you nothing. THAT is what I'm talking about!

 

Bob

[MunichAtNight]

Hello!

 

Interesting discussion with many aspects worth considering. It shows me that there are probably many more people who think similarly to me.

 

For me, EAA was and is the observation of space using modern techniques. Electrical, electronic devices are largely used, such as cameras, computers, goto mounts, rotators, focus motors and, and, and ... and everything is supported with and by often freely available software such as Stellarium, Sharpcap, etc.

 

The three most important advantages of EAA for me are:

• I can do it at home in a suburb of a light-trying big city (Munich).
• I can do it together with my wife, who shares my passion for astronomy just as much as I do.
• With the help of computers, I can easily document my observations with images in order to be able to learn and compare based on observed observation sessions and also to search for and find new observation targets from my own astronomy history.

In order to further develop my own skills and knowledge, I like to talk to like-minded people and constantly try to expand my horizons on the complex field of astronomy with questions and discussions. This also includes forums like this one. But I also exchange ideas with other people in person in the local astronomy association of the Munich People's Observatory and not just online.

 

Unfortunately, I find that this forum section for EAA is becoming less and less interesting to me compared to what it was a year or two ago. The EAA area has developed into a pure picture and equipment comparison competition. Astronomy-based thoughts and questions are discussed less and less, or almost no more at all. In my understanding and in comparison to the huge, complex universe we observe, arbitrary and, above all, unnecessary boundaries are drawn for images shown in order to actually achieve what?

 

Why should I not be allowed to observe light that travels to me for thousands, tens of thousands of years and unimaginably much longer for longer than sixty minutes? A really stupid approach, especially if you want to see and find more and smaller details in your photos or if you want to observe faint objects.

 

Why shouldn't you use newer software technologies later if they allow you to use time for more observation? For example, I've been avoiding creating darks and flats for some time now. Creating Darks and Flats used to cost me fifteen to thirty minutes at the beginning of each observation night. Now I work with hot pixel removal, gradient removal in Sharpcap and soft flats. Soft flats are subsequently created using software in a very short space of time using a Photoshop plugin and offset against the final stacked image from Sharpcap.

 

Hot pixel and gradient removal using Sharpcap in real time and subsequent soft flats using Photoshop save me a total of fifteen, twenty or more minutes of time every night. Time that I would rather use either for longer-term observation or, simply put, to get to bed half an hour earlier.

 

Servus - MunichtAtNight - Ewald

[amitshesh]

Hello!

Interesting discussion with many aspects worth considering. It shows me that there are probably many more people who think similarly to me.

For me, EAA was and is the observation of space using modern techniques. Electrical, electronic devices are largely used, such as cameras, computers, goto mounts, rotators, focus motors and, and, and ... and everything is supported with and by often freely available software such as Stellarium, Sharpcap, etc.

The three most important advantages of EAA for me are:

• I can do it at home in a suburb of a light-trying big city (Munich).
• I can do it together with my wife, who shares my passion for astronomy just as much as I do.
• With the help of computers, I can easily document my observations with images in order to be able to learn and compare based on observed observation sessions and also to search for and find new observation targets from my own astronomy history.

In order to further develop my own skills and knowledge, I like to talk to like-minded people and constantly try to expand my horizons on the complex field of astronomy with questions and discussions. This also includes forums like this one. But I also exchange ideas with other people in person in the local astronomy association of the Munich People's Observatory and not just online.

Unfortunately, I find that this forum section for EAA is becoming less and less interesting to me compared to what it was a year or two ago. The EAA area has developed into a pure picture and equipment comparison competition. Astronomy-based thoughts and questions are discussed less and less, or almost no more at all. In my understanding and in comparison to the huge, complex universe we observe, arbitrary and, above all, unnecessary boundaries are drawn for images shown in order to actually achieve what?

Why should I not be allowed to observe light that travels to me for thousands, tens of thousands of years and unimaginably much longer for longer than sixty minutes? A really stupid approach, especially if you want to see and find more and smaller details in your photos or if you want to observe faint objects.

Why shouldn't you use newer software technologies later if they allow you to use time for more observation? For example, I've been avoiding creating darks and flats for some time now. Creating Darks and Flats used to cost me fifteen to thirty minutes at the beginning of each observation night. Now I work with hot pixel removal, gradient removal in Sharpcap and soft flats. Soft flats are subsequently created using software in a very short space of time using a Photoshop plugin and offset against the final stacked image from Sharpcap.

Hot pixel and gradient removal using Sharpcap in real time and subsequent soft flats using Photoshop save me a total of fifteen, twenty or more minutes of time every night. Time that I would rather use either for longer-term observation or, simply put, to get to bed half an hour earlier.

Servus - MunichtAtNight - Ewald

At a technical level I agree with you. But at a practical level, look at this thread. Just equipment causes people to question where the hobby is going and where they fit in. With the time restriction removed, this forum will be taken over by the AP folks. There are several threads that show what happens. As an example there is an extremely long thread about az GTI in eq mode, that was taken over by comments that dismissed the mount compared to "true AP mounts".

A more recent example is the seestar and dwarf ii threads. Soon people ask "can I get individual subs" and then proceed to do post with siril and pixinsight. The $400 affordable setup meant to entice new users turns into a crude, poorly engineered AP rig. The threads are eventually dominated by such users, and the poor guys (like me) who are attracted to the eaa use of these devices feel like they no longer fit into what the thread has become.

[BrentKnight]

There is a pinned topic on the forum called EAA Observing Reports. Nobody posts there. It's not the forum that discourages posting more than just pictures and equipment...