TIMES ARE CHANGING IN ASTRONOMY

Several years ago (longer than I like to remember) I was exposed to computers. These computers were the big IBM type that took up an entire room and no one---and I mean no one---except the computer guru was allowed to touch them in any way.  This expert would sometimes ask "what can we do for you that might help in your work".  Most of us didn't know enough about computers to even tell the guy what we needed.  Many years later, Apple introduced the MacIntosh---that small desktop computer with a 9 inch screen and a program that would allow you to draw very basic pictures and a program that would allow you to write a letter or something. I knew they were on to something because the Mac had what is generally referred to as a "graphic interface" with a "mouse" to use as a pointer.  I bought one the first year they were available and I have been a Mac user ever since.  It is hard to change---especially if there is no other computer product that even compares. But this blog isn't about computers.  


It was a lot the same way when I finally discovered the hobby of astronomy. I won't bore you with the details but it took me a long time to finally decide on a telescope and mount to buy.  For some reason that escapes me now, I decided on a reflector scope on an equatorial mount.  The 8 inch Orion arrived in April 2000 and I stayed with it faithfully until Feb. 2003.  That's when my 12.5 inch Meade DOB arrived.  I have owned several scopes since then but needless to say, they all have been on Dobson mounts.  These scopes are a lot like those first graphic interface computers---you just point them in the general direction of the desired target, make a few small adjustments using a tel-rad or finder scope and presto, there is your target.  At least that is the theory.  Sometimes, for some unknown reason, it is a little more difficult than that. But that's my story and I'm sticking to it.  


When I began to see some of the "new" computerized scope mounts at star parties I couldn't think of anything good to say about them because I considered their owners to be traitors to the astro observing community.  By that I mean they were giving up the old fashioned method of finding things in the sky---namely star hopping etc. to find the desired object.  Those guys only had to learn a few alignment stars to set up their "computerized" scopes and then just punch in the desired target in a hand controller.  How could any really dedicated observer give in to such juvenile means of finding those difficult clusters and galaxies.  They didn't even have to learn the constellations or any other means of navigating the night sky.  And besides that, the mounts and motors driving them weren't all that reliable---not to mention the deafening noise those things made as they went from one target to another.  It was nothing but plain old unadulterated treason---that was unless I needed some help from my less learned friend to find an object--then I relented just a little bit.  I didn't like to admit that these electronic gadgets were actually helping folks find things they wanted to see but that was exactly what was happening.  Just like the first computers I encountered, those scopes with their computerized mounts began to improve in quality and I began to notice that a lot of folks that were buying them were having good success and enjoyment in finding objects in the night sky.  Maybe there was something good about these scopes and mounts after all.
Needless to say but I am still a dyed-in-the-wool DOB user and that will always be my scope of choice but I must concede that new and different things are coming along in amateur astronomy circles that are bring more new folks into the hobby.  


One of those new and amazing things to enliven the astro community is the ability for so many folks to do astro imaging.  There isn't a single one of us that hasn't gone goo-goo eyed over some of the images we have seen in those slick astro magazines.  You can see detail and colors that we will never be able to see thru the eyepiece. ( I say NEVER with the understanding that whatever we can think of we will eventually find away to do).  Just like those first IBM computers I mentioned, if you could get all the tapes to run properly and if there wasn't any holes in the punch card inputs that were in the wrong place, you could get some results.  That's the way it was with the first amateur astronomers efforts with astro imaging.  If no one accidentally flashed a white light, or kicked the tripod, or a battery didn't fail, or----I think you get the idea.  It was difficult to get a good picture.  And I haven't even mentioned the large sums of money that was invested to buy very expensive equipment.  And would you believe it, just like computers, imaging equipment became more affordable and reliable.  No longer is it necessary to set up all that equipment, start the imaging process and then retire to someplace to read or whatever while your camera recorded a 4/5 hour image.  You can see the trend at astronomy parties and even in the catalogs of manufactures that sell astro equipment.  First there was the eyepiece cameras that allowed you to see a image on an attached TV screen.  These were great for gatherings where several folks were trying to see the sky but for some unknown reason they just never seemed to catch on.  Then came the very basic black & white imaging cameras that supposedly allowed you to do some rather elementary imaging of the planets.  But that little venture into imaging just didn't satisfy the deep craving in some observers to image deep sky objects.  Then computers and their ability to "stack" literally 100's of short exposure pictures together to make one very excellent image burst the bubble of spending really big bucks to do imaging came on the scene.  In my opinion, that's when imaging became a possibility for the average astro observer.  And I don't see any reason not to place that capability in the hands of anyone interested.  


So the move goes on.  Personally, I do not see me getting into the imaging process other than using my Cannon Rebel Xsi to shoot some pics at the eyepiece but I am willing to concede that astro imaging is making a great impact on the hobby of star gazing.  After all, anything (well anything within legal limits) that brings more folks into our hobby is welcomed.  


One thing that I see looming on the horizon with an increase in imaging is the competition between those that are strictly visual observers and those that want to do imaging.  Even tho the imaging process now is much less restrictive with respect to long exposure times that were required in the past, it still requires a very strict management of external light sources.  A laser beam or a short burst of white light from any source can completely destroy a night of imaging.  Most folks are acutely aware of this but it has caused some very harsh words and feelings more than once---especially at a large organized star party.  Visual observers are adamant about white light but an occasional flash light from opening an auto door or even an accidental flash of the headlight can be tolerated.  Not quite so with imagers.  And they can be quite vocal about their displeasure.  And this is where a little give and take is going to be necessary.  This is not normally a problem with local or club star parties.  Most attendees are not there to do imaging so very little conflict comes about.  But at major star parties there are a lot of folks that are there because the location has very dark skies and it is favorable to imaging. And they want it dark---period.  


I don't see an easy solution to this problem.  You could segregate the imagers from the visual guys with respect to location on the observing site but that wouldn't solve the problem of an occasional stray light beam or the use of a laser pointer to help guide someone to a desired target. After all, it isn't just the presence of a stray light source, it is the fact that the light will frequently be picked up by the camera and thereby destroying or degrading the intended image.  You could hold an "imagers only" star party but if that happened to be at some highly desirable dark site where visual observers might want to gather, that could cause an undesirable conflict.  


One solution that is being tried at major star parties is total restriction against any kind of external light source during the hours of darkness. This seems to work for most folks but there is always the occasional "you can't tell me what I can or can't do" person that spoils the apple barrel so to speak.  We all could do without this kind of individual.  We can also do without that imager that has nothing to say except ********when someone does show a light no matter how unintentionally. 


 Somehow we must find a way to keep this potential conflict from driving astronomy hobbyist apart.  If you have some good ideas, write them as comments to this article or forward them directly to me at my e-mail address.  I will try to get them posted for all to read.