| |
Main
Date: 12 Aug 2006 20:24:20
From: bucky
Subject: Astrophotography on a Shoe String?
|
I want to do time lapse Astrophotography on a tight budget.
Things such as galaxies and nebula.
What telescope/mount/guidance would be cheapest,
but still be able to take good 30 minute plus time lapse photographs?
|
|
| |
Date: 14 Aug 2006 18:53:20
From: buckyballs
Subject: Re: Astrophotography on a Shoe String?
|
I guess not.
"bucky" <123abc@nospam.biz > wrote in message
news:UNqDg.7109$9T3.4669@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net...
>I want to do time lapse Astrophotography on a tight budget.
> Things such as galaxies and nebula.
>
> What telescope/mount/guidance would be cheapest,
> but still be able to take good 30 minute plus time lapse photographs?
>
>
|
| | |
Date: 14 Aug 2006 17:41:19
From: Stephen Paul
Subject: Re: Astrophotography on a Shoe String?
|
buckyballs wrote:
> I guess not.
>
> "bucky" <123abc@nospam.biz> wrote in message
> news:UNqDg.7109$9T3.4669@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net...
>> I want to do time lapse Astrophotography on a tight budget.
>> Things such as galaxies and nebula.
>>
>> What telescope/mount/guidance would be cheapest,
>> but still be able to take good 30 minute plus time lapse photographs?
>>
>>
>
A few issues with your request, and a suggestion:
30 minutes is a really long time for a mount to track well without an
autoguider, and at that, it's going to require a substantially _good_
mount ($$).
Galaxies and Nebula are the hardest of all targets. They are very dim,
very diffuse, and have extremely subtle contrast variations that require
a huge dynamic range of pixel depth in a camera ($$).
I suggest you try star clusters and those few large, bright nebula like
M8, M17, and M42, using a DSLR or film camera and a small fast refractor
(400mm to 800mm focal length), on a late model CG-5 or an older (or
newer if you prefer) Vixen GP. A guiding method might still be
necessary, especially for film. With the DSLR you can take a long
sequence of short exposures for stacking, tossing those that have
excessive star trailing due to tracking errors in the mount. The CG-5 or
the GP mounts can be fine tuned and polar aligned well enough to give
decent 30 second unguided subs for stacking.
|
| |
Date: 15 Aug 2006 08:34:14
From: Brian Tung
Subject: Re: Astrophotography on a Shoe String?
|
bucky wrote:
> I want to do time lapse Astrophotography on a tight budget.
> Things such as galaxies and nebula.
>
> What telescope/mount/guidance would be cheapest,
> but still be able to take good 30 minute plus time lapse photographs?
Do you really mean time lapse, as in taking a sequence of snapshots that
are then registered and sequenced to form a short movie, or do you mean
time *exposure*, in which film or an electronic detector (CCD, etc) is
left exposed to the sky for a long period of time to image dim fuzzies?
If the latter (as I suspect), you may want to try piggy-back photography
first, which uses the camera's own lens, with the camera mounted as a
piece on top of the mount (either directly, or on top of a mounted
telescope). Decent shots can be had with just a few minutes of exposure
in this configuration.
You may want to take a look at Michael Covington's book on astrophoto-
graphy, if it's still available.
--
Brian Tung <brian@isi.edu >
The Astronomy Corner at http://astro.isi.edu/
Unofficial C5+ Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/c5plus/
The PleiadAtlas Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/pleiadatlas/
My Own Personal FAQ (SAA) at http://astro.isi.edu/reference/faq.html
|
| |
Date: 15 Aug 2006 15:14:48
From: Linux Utilisateur
Subject: Re: Astrophotography on a Shoe String?
|
Ernie Dunbar wrote:
> Oriel is in fact an interesting development in AI.
[reminder missive deleted for brevity]
In that case alt.astronomy full of AIs :)
|
| |
Date: 15 Aug 2006 13:33:57
From: laura halliday
Subject: Re: Astrophotography on a Shoe String?
|
Ernie Dunbar wrote:
> Linux Utilisateur wrote:
> > oriel36 wrote:
> >
> > > The man can do what Tunc Tezel did and do humanity a real favor.
> >
> > You are an idiot!
> >
> > > He can track the position of a planet against the stellar background
> > > just as the Ptolemaic and Copernican astronomers did.He can assemble a
> > > series of images of planetary positions to each other using the stellar
> > > background as a reference but paying no attention to a celestial sphere
> > > structure.
> >
> > The only thing you continue to do is demonstrate that you are a loon.
>
> Oriel is in fact an interesting development in AI. If you make your AI
> look like it's crazy, then the horrible inconsistencies in its
> behaviour won't look like it's a computer program, but the erratic
> ramblings of a madman...
The postings in question have always reminded me of
the posts, long ago, about Turkey and Armenian genocide.
Is this the USENET version of showing one's age? :-)
Laura Halliday VE7LDH "Que les nuages soient notre
Grid: CN89mg pied a terre..."
ICBM: 49 16.05 N 122 56.92 W - Hospital/Shafte
|
| |
Date: 15 Aug 2006 12:08:13
From: Ernie Dunbar
Subject: Re: Astrophotography on a Shoe String?
|
Linux Utilisateur wrote:
> oriel36 wrote:
>
> > The man can do what Tunc Tezel did and do humanity a real favor.
>
> You are an idiot!
>
> > He can track the position of a planet against the stellar background
> > just as the Ptolemaic and Copernican astronomers did.He can assemble a
> > series of images of planetary positions to each other using the stellar
> > background as a reference but paying no attention to a celestial sphere
> > structure.
>
> The only thing you continue to do is demonstrate that you are a loon.
Oriel is in fact an interesting development in AI. If you make your AI
look like it's crazy, then the horrible inconsistencies in its
behaviour won't look like it's a computer program, but the erratic
ramblings of a madman.
I can prove he's a computer program, just by the fact that he'll
probably respond to me, and his post will have little, if anything to
do with my post. He'll probably go on about newtonian motion and how
it's bumkus, despite the fact that I haven't refuted anything he's said.
|
| |
Date: 15 Aug 2006 10:56:48
From: Linux Utilisateur
Subject: Re: Astrophotography on a Shoe String?
|
oriel36 wrote:
> The man can do what Tunc Tezel did and do humanity a real favor.
You are an idiot!
> He can track the position of a planet against the stellar background
> just as the Ptolemaic and Copernican astronomers did.He can assemble a
> series of images of planetary positions to each other using the stellar
> background as a reference but paying no attention to a celestial sphere
> structure.
The only thing you continue to do is demonstrate that you are a loon.
|
| |
Date: 15 Aug 2006 10:39:14
From: oriel36
Subject: Re: Astrophotography on a Shoe String?
|
Brian Tung wrote:
> bucky wrote:
> > I want to do time lapse Astrophotography on a tight budget.
> > Things such as galaxies and nebula.
> >
> > What telescope/mount/guidance would be cheapest,
> > but still be able to take good 30 minute plus time lapse photographs?
>
> Do you really mean time lapse, as in taking a sequence of snapshots that
> are then registered and sequenced to form a short movie, or do you mean
> time *exposure*, in which film or an electronic detector (CCD, etc) is
> left exposed to the sky for a long period of time to image dim fuzzies?
>
> If the latter (as I suspect), you may want to try piggy-back photography
> first, which uses the camera's own lens, with the camera mounted as a
> piece on top of the mount (either directly, or on top of a mounted
> telescope). Decent shots can be had with just a few minutes of exposure
> in this configuration.
>
> You may want to take a look at Michael Covington's book on astrophoto-
> graphy, if it's still available.
>
> --
> Brian Tung <brian@isi.edu>
> The Astronomy Corner at http://astro.isi.edu/
> Unofficial C5+ Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/c5plus/
> The PleiadAtlas Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/pleiadatlas/
> My Own Personal FAQ (SAA) at http://astro.isi.edu/reference/faq.html
The man can do what Tunc Tezel did and do humanity a real favor.
He can track the position of a planet against the stellar background
just as the Ptolemaic and Copernican astronomers did.He can assemble a
series of images of planetary positions to each other using the stellar
background as a reference but paying no attention to a celestial sphere
structure.
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/image/0112/jupsatloop_tezel.jpg
Those images of Saturn and Jupiter are taken over the course of a year
against the same stellar background.It is when time lapse footage is
applied that Copernican heliocentric reasoning really blossoms as we
see how the Earth's orbital motion overtakes those tow outer planets
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/image/0112/JuSa2000_tezel.gif
For once astrophotographers can really help humanity with material like
this,the ability to render the Copernican heliocentric system
accurately and bringing a breath of fresh air to this discipline.If as
an astrophotographer,the original posters recognises how the
heliocentric motion of the planets is seen directly from Earth he will
detest the stupid Newtonian mutation which determines otherwise.
"For to the earth planetary motions appear sometimes direct, sometimes
stationary, nay, and sometimes retrograde. But from the sun they are
always seen direct, " Newton
|
| |
Date: 16 Aug 2006 12:54:41
From: oriel36
Subject: Re: Astrophotography on a Shoe String?
|
This is a simple matter of pointing out that planetary heliocentric
motion is seen directly from Earth,the original poster of this thread
can develop time lapse footage to support this great Western
astronomical achievement and demolish the pathetic Newtonian reasoning
that disregards this easily understood working principle of Copernicus
and Kepler.
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/image/0112/jupsatloop_tezel.jpg
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/image/0112/JuSa2000_tezel.gif
The great astronomers such as Copernicus and Kepler would have
marvelled at the ability of time lapse footage to represent their
working principles for the Earth's planetary motion and it is up to any
astrophotographer tocreate new ways to make the original insight
blossom.
As for Newtonian empiricists,well their time has come and
gone,technology has outrun the abtruse and destructive notions.Looking
at the other thread,it must seem like they are impressing the hell out
of each other but the point of departure for their comical celestial
sphere system is contrary to the time lapse footage of Saturn,Jupiter
and an orbitally moving Earth overtaking both.
The following statement is entirely false,not just for Copernican
heliocentricity but for its Ptolemaic astronomical roots -
"For to the earth planetary motions appear sometimes direct, sometimes
stationary, nay, and sometimes retrograde. But from the sun they are
always seen direct, " Newton
Defending the honor of Isaac is fine for theorists,but considering what
is at stake with 21st century data and global
climate,astrophotographers can play their part in restoring an
astronomical heritage from behind centuries of linguistic empirical
junk.
There is no such thing as artificial intelligence,there is however such
a thing as intuitive intelligence and most people here, and especially
the empiricists, have this faculty beaten out of them and
unfortunately the intellectual intelligence which affirms or rejects
these intuitive insights based on physical considerations never really
mesh.
Ernie Dunbar wrote:
> Linux Utilisateur wrote:
> > oriel36 wrote:
> >
> > > The man can do what Tunc Tezel did and do humanity a real favor.
> >
> > You are an idiot!
> >
> > > He can track the position of a planet against the stellar background
> > > just as the Ptolemaic and Copernican astronomers did.He can assemble a
> > > series of images of planetary positions to each other using the stellar
> > > background as a reference but paying no attention to a celestial sphere
> > > structure.
> >
> > The only thing you continue to do is demonstrate that you are a loon.
>
> Oriel is in fact an interesting development in AI. If you make your AI
> look like it's crazy, then the horrible inconsistencies in its
> behaviour won't look like it's a computer program, but the erratic
> ramblings of a madman.
>
> I can prove he's a computer program, just by the fact that he'll
> probably respond to me, and his post will have little, if anything to
> do with my post. He'll probably go on about newtonian motion and how
> it's bumkus, despite the fact that I haven't refuted anything he's said.
|
|
