| |
Main
Date: 18 Aug 2007 12:24:44
From: JimC
Subject: Best Planetariums
|
I recently visited the Rose "Space Theater" in the Hayden Sphere at the
New York City Museum of Natural History, which the guide books described
as one of the best in the world for viewing a "star show". The show was
indeed worth seeing, but I was disappointed in the quality of the
projected images. The stars seemed blurry, as if the system was either
out of focus or the projected stars and other images were beyond the the
limit of the system's resolution. I gather that this system is something
like a giant IMAX projection system with spherical screen, rather than
one designed to show the stars clearly. - There was no optical
projection device that I could see in the center of the sphere, and
several projectors of some kind at the periphery.
Can someone comment on this system and perhaps suggest others that would
be better for seeing stars, constellations, Messiers, etc., more clearly?
Jim Cate
|
|
| |
Date: 19 Aug 2007 11:51:28
From: Dennis Woos
Subject: Re: Best Planetariums
|
>
> I recently visited the Rose "Space Theater" in the Hayden Sphere at the
> New York City Museum of Natural History, which the guide books described
> as one of the best in the world for viewing a "star show". The show was
> indeed worth seeing, but I was disappointed in the quality of the
> projected images. The stars seemed blurry, as if the system was either out
> of focus or the projected stars and other images were beyond the the limit
> of the system's resolution. I gather that this system is something like a
> giant IMAX projection system with spherical screen, rather than one
> designed to show the stars clearly. - There was no optical projection
> device that I could see in the center of the sphere, and several
> projectors of some kind at the periphery.
>
> Can someone comment on this system and perhaps suggest others that would
> be better for seeing stars, constellations, Messiers, etc., more clearly?
>
> Jim Cate
Supposedly there is a highly accurate Zeiss starball, projecting such detail
that folks are encouraged to bring and use binos in the dome.
Dennis
|
| |
Date: 18 Aug 2007 16:43:16
From: Chris L Peterson
Subject: Re: Best Planetariums
|
On Sat, 18 Aug 2007 12:24:44 -0600, JimC <avocat5@sbcglobal.net > wrote:
>I recently visited the Rose "Space Theater" in the Hayden Sphere at the
>New York City Museum of Natural History, which the guide books described
>as one of the best in the world for viewing a "star show". The show was
>indeed worth seeing, but I was disappointed in the quality of the
>projected images. The stars seemed blurry, as if the system was either
>out of focus or the projected stars and other images were beyond the the
>limit of the system's resolution. I gather that this system is something
>like a giant IMAX projection system with spherical screen, rather than
>one designed to show the stars clearly. - There was no optical
>projection device that I could see in the center of the sphere, and
>several projectors of some kind at the periphery.
>
>Can someone comment on this system and perhaps suggest others that would
>be better for seeing stars, constellations, Messiers, etc., more clearly?
If you want a high resolution star show, with high contrast, you need to
find a planetarium with an old fashioned starball projector. They are
getting rare, though. Digital projection systems, such as are now used
by all major planetariums, are wonderful in terms of capability,
allowing for things that were never possible before. But even the best
are low resolution compared with a projected aperture, and none can
create a truly black background.
No doubt digital projection technology will continue to improve, but
don't expect to see digital planetarium optical quality improve
dramatically any time soon.
There are a handful of hybrid systems that use both a starball and a
digital projector. I've never seen one in operation, however.
_________________________________________________
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com
|
| | |
Date: 19 Aug 2007 01:50:37
From: Ernie Wright
Subject: Re: Best Planetariums
|
Chris L Peterson wrote:
> There are a handful of hybrid systems that use both a starball and a
> digital projector. I've never seen one in operation, however.
The planetarium at the newly renovated Griffith Observatory is one of
them.
http://www.griffithobservatory.org/bsoplanet.html
I just got back from a trip to L.A. that included a stop at Griffith.
The new planetarium uses both digital (Evans and Sutherland) and optical
(Zeiss) projectors. The first show put together with this new equipment
was visually excellent.
The content, on the other hand, struck me as insipid and patronizing.
I found myself wishing I could watch the show without the (live but
scripted) narration. Hopefully in the future they'll make room for more
traditional shows, and for better writing in the more cinematic ones.
- Ernie http://home.comcast.net/~erniew
|
| | | |
Date: 19 Aug 2007 09:26:57
From: Marty
Subject: Re: Best Planetariums
|
Geez... I hope this sporge attack or whatever it is ends before too
long. Using my webtv, which has no filters or killfiles, I had to scan
past over a thousand crap posts to catch up to this thread. One
twisted, sick, case of arrested development...
Marty
|
| | |
Date: 18 Aug 2007 19:33:10
From: Marty
Subject: Re: Best Planetariums
|
It's been a long time since I've been to a planetarium. (None near me
anyway...) Wonderful, magical, memories from when I was a kid, but now
days, very few even have a "pointer show" any more. All sorts of
special effects, etc, but very little "stars on the ceiling." This is
especially sad when so few kids ever see a starry sky for real... now,
they can't even see an imitation one. And we wonder why so few kids are
developing an interest in amateur astronomy.
Marty
|
| | | |
Date: 18 Aug 2007 19:08:50
From: Chris L Peterson
Subject: Re: Best Planetariums
|
On Sat, 18 Aug 2007 19:33:10 -0500, movac5@webtv.net (Marty) wrote:
>It's been a long time since I've been to a planetarium. (None near me
>anyway...) Wonderful, magical, memories from when I was a kid, but now
>days, very few even have a "pointer show" any more. All sorts of
>special effects, etc, but very little "stars on the ceiling." This is
>especially sad when so few kids ever see a starry sky for real... now,
>they can't even see an imitation one. And we wonder why so few kids are
>developing an interest in amateur astronomy.
True. I've played with the new digital planetarium at the Denver Museum
of Nature and Science, and when you're at the console you can do amazing
things. You can drive yourself all over the Earth, to other planets,
around and outside the Milky Way. You can go to any time, and change the
rate and direction that time flows. With this tool, it is possible to
give the most amazing star shows.
But for the public, they don't use it this way. All they do is show
canned shows- tours of the Solar System, visits to black holes, etc. The
shows are very nice, and have high production values, but I'd rather see
star shows like I used to see at Griffith Park when I was a kid. But
there's little interest at the museum in using their planetarium this
way.
_________________________________________________
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com
|
| | | | |
Date: 19 Aug 2007 00:00:31
From: Marty
Subject: Re: Best Planetariums
|
Chris Peterson was saying
>True. I've played with the new digital
> planetarium at the Denver Museum of
> Nature and Science, and when you're at
> the console you can do amazing things.
> You can drive yourself all over the
> Earth, to other planets, around and
> outside the Milky Way. You can go to
> any time, and change the rate and
> direction that time flows. With this tool,
> it is possible to give the most amazing
> star shows.
>But for the public, they don't use it this
> way. All they do is show canned shows-
> tours of the Solar System, visits to black
> holes, etc. The shows are very nice, and
> have high production values, but I'd
> rather see star shows like I used to see
> at Griffith Park when I was a kid. But
> there's little interest at the museum in
> using their planetarium this way.
When I was a kid growing up in Lincoln, Nebraska, I felt that the State
Museum at the University of Nebraska had to be one of the most fabulous
places on the face of the Earth. And once the Mueller Planetarium was
built inside of it, that was the gem of the entire place! About 18
years ago, when my kids were young, I drove 145 miles down to that very
planetarium to show them the wonder that I experienced as a kid.
(although they lived under a pretty decent sky out here in rural Iowa..)
It was a disappointment. We watched an excellent video of flying over
the surface of Mars, and watched a "Magic School Bus" slide show about
the solar system, but the only time the star projector was even used was
to spin around when the Magic School Bus was crashing or something. My
young son enjoyed it, but driving home, he told me that his favorite
part was that brief moment when the ceiling was covered with stars.
I've talked with planetarium workers who tell me that there simply
isn't any interest in the public to come and see a "pointer show," and
they may be right. I can't understand it. Maybe the newer projectors,
even with all of their versatility, can't capture the public's attention
the way the brighter, sharper, but more primitive projectors could.
It bothers me though, when I look at a planetarium schedule and see more
time spent with musical light shows that have nothing to do with
astronomy than planetarium shows, especially when I know that the
planetarium shows just aren't even "planetarium shows" any more.
As an aside, a few years ago I bought the November 1957 issue of
Sky & Telescope to have the brief article announcing the launch of
Sputnik 1. I was tickled and surprised to find an ad by Spitz
Laboratories on page 32 of that issue announcing "The latest Spitz Model
A-1 PLANETARIUM has been shipped to University of Nebraska State Museum
Lincoln, Nebraska." TWO blasts of nostalgia out of one issue! (Not to
mention all the other fun ads and stuff...)
Marty
|
| | | | | |
Date: 18 Aug 2007 23:33:30
From: Chris L Peterson
Subject: Re: Best Planetariums
|
On Sun, 19 Aug 2007 00:00:31 -0500, movac5@webtv.net (Marty) wrote:
>I've talked with planetarium workers who tell me that there simply
>isn't any interest in the public to come and see a "pointer show," and
>they may be right.
I don't think they are. A few of us have talked to people and made
informal surveys, and it appears that there is a high level of interest
in star shows- enough to support at least one or two programs a week in
Denver (compared with several shows a day of the canned variety).
It's a symptom of modern museumology- the belief that museums survive by
competing with theme parks and other hard-core entertainment venues.
There's probably some truth there, but it is taken too far. Of course,
for what most museums charge for admission these days, families often do
compare them with them with theme parks.
_________________________________________________
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com
|
| | | | |
Date: 19 Aug 2007 02:23:49
From: JimC
Subject: Re: Best Planetariums
|
Chris L Peterson wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Aug 2007 19:33:10 -0500, movac5@webtv.net (Marty) wrote:
>
>
>>It's been a long time since I've been to a planetarium. (None near me
>>anyway...) Wonderful, magical, memories from when I was a kid, but now
>>days, very few even have a "pointer show" any more. All sorts of
>>special effects, etc, but very little "stars on the ceiling." This is
>>especially sad when so few kids ever see a starry sky for real... now,
>>they can't even see an imitation one. And we wonder why so few kids are
>>developing an interest in amateur astronomy.
>
>
> True. I've played with the new digital planetarium at the Denver Museum
> of Nature and Science, and when you're at the console you can do amazing
> things. You can drive yourself all over the Earth, to other planets,
> around and outside the Milky Way. You can go to any time, and change the
> rate and direction that time flows. With this tool, it is possible to
> give the most amazing star shows.
>
> But for the public, they don't use it this way. All they do is show
> canned shows- tours of the Solar System, visits to black holes, etc. The
> shows are very nice, and have high production values, but I'd rather see
> star shows like I used to see at Griffith Park when I was a kid. But
> there's little interest at the museum in using their planetarium this
> way.
>
> _________________________________________________
>
> Chris L Peterson
> Cloudbait Observatory
> http://www.cloudbait.com
I remember seeing a planetarium show in Chicago years ago (maybe it's
changed since then) that showed thousands of stars, all crystal-clear.
Quite an experience.
Jim
|
| |
Date: 18 Aug 2007 20:39:44
From: Sjouke Burry
Subject: Re: Best Planetariums
|
JimC wrote:
>
> I recently visited the Rose "Space Theater" in the Hayden Sphere at the
> New York City Museum of Natural History, which the guide books described
> as one of the best in the world for viewing a "star show". The show was
> indeed worth seeing, but I was disappointed in the quality of the
> projected images. The stars seemed blurry, as if the system was either
> out of focus or the projected stars and other images were beyond the the
> limit of the system's resolution. I gather that this system is something
> like a giant IMAX projection system with spherical screen, rather than
> one designed to show the stars clearly. - There was no optical
> projection device that I could see in the center of the sphere, and
> several projectors of some kind at the periphery.
>
> Can someone comment on this system and perhaps suggest others that would
> be better for seeing stars, constellations, Messiers, etc., more clearly?
>
> Jim Cate
I like stellarium,
http://www.stellarium.org/wiki/index.php/Download
It gives a nice real sky look, with features able
to switch on/off.
|
| | |
Date: 18 Aug 2007 12:51:30
From: Greg Crinklaw
Subject: Re: Best Planetariums
|
Sjouke Burry wrote:
> JimC wrote:
>>
>> I recently visited the Rose "Space Theater" in the Hayden Sphere at
>> the New York City Museum of Natural History, which the guide books
>> described as one of the best in the world for viewing a "star show".
>> The show was indeed worth seeing, but I was disappointed in the
>> quality of the projected images. The stars seemed blurry, as if the
>> system was either out of focus or the projected stars and other images
>> were beyond the the limit of the system's resolution. I gather that
>> this system is something like a giant IMAX projection system with
>> spherical screen, rather than one designed to show the stars clearly.
>> - There was no optical projection device that I could see in the
>> center of the sphere, and several projectors of some kind at the
>> periphery.
>>
>> Can someone comment on this system and perhaps suggest others that
>> would be better for seeing stars, constellations, Messiers, etc., more
>> clearly?
>>
>> Jim Cate
> I like stellarium,
> http://www.stellarium.org/wiki/index.php/Download
> It gives a nice real sky look, with features able
> to switch on/off.
Are you a bot or do you not read carefully before responding?
To the OP: I suggest bringing this question to sci.astro.planetarium. I
am sure there are people there who could help you, particularly with
regard to the projection question.
Clear skies,
Greg
--
Greg Crinklaw
Astronomical Software Developer
Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)
SkyTools: http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html
Observing: http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html
Comets: http://comets.skyhound.com
To reply take out your eye
|
|
