Well said Chuck :) On 5/10/10 8:22 PM, Chuck Hards wrote:
Brent Watson had a very good observation on astrophotography. He stated that everything has been imaged innumerable times, and often by people with much better equipment, seeing, and ability than he (and me). It is duplicate work.
While part of me agrees with Brent, I would compare it to gardening. Billions of people have raised plants on a little plot of ground outside their back door, yet it still nourishes the soul just to go through the motions. It is a personal connection with nature. You invest the time, do the work, nurture the seeds, the plants, until you are rewarded with a lovely bloom, or perhpas a flavorful, nutritious fruit. The soul has been enriched for the experience.
Astrophotography fulfills the same human need. It connects the individual with nature, for no other purpose than to capture an image of an object in time, and enrich the soul. It is a method of achieving personal focus.
People like Patrick, and, to a much lesser extent, myself, began taking astrophotographs back when it was done by only a couple of thousand people- at MOST- worldwide. We used equipment meant for other things and adapted it to the skies. Sometimes with success, most often with mixed results or dismal failures. We did it because it was different- unusual. Today, while I am certainly interested in deep-sky imaging using modern techniques, I am mostly motivated by the transient. I like movement, change. Comets, planetary phenomenon, the sun- these will probably hold my attention most, with the deep-sky always being there when nothing else is going-on above. "A Singer Of These Ageless Times, With Kitchen Prose, and Gutter Rhymes"... ;o)
Today, hundreds of thousands of people take pictures of the skies, and with commercially-available equipment that yields results that are far superior to what the major observatories of the world could achieve 40 or 50 years ago. The same objects are imaged millions of times, over and over. In most cases, the reason is just because it takes the imager to a better place mentally. There is a certain Zen to be experienced.
Many take images as part of their data-gathering, for genuine scientific pursuit. Patrick does this. Patrol work, photometry, spectroscopy, all are forms of astrophotography.
But I'm guessing that your question is aimed mostly at the "nature lover" among amateur astronomers. These are the ones who take pictures for the same reason as the photographer snapping a shot of the Grand Canyon, or Goblin Valley, or Old Faithful. Their souls are enriched for the experience of capturing a moment in time, of some of God's better efforts.
Does that help, Michael?
On 5/10/10, Michael Vanopstall<opstall@math.utah.edu> wrote:
I'm curious if anyone (on these cloudy nights) could give a succinct explanation of what is interesting about astrophotography. I have not (and will not) been drawn in, and I'm curious about what interests others.
_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://www.slas.us/gallery2/main.php Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com