Re: [APML] NGC 7331

[larry mcmanus <lmcmanus@clearpointadv.com>]

Alan

Good idea. Why don't we put it to a vote. Lets see what the whole lists
thinks.

Larry



on 8/5/03 2:22 PM, Alan Voetsch at critter12952@yahoo.com wrote:

> Hi Paul,
> 
> I've tried to say before what you said here. I think you stated my
> thoughts exactly, but expressed them better than I ever could.
> Excellent, excellent... and thanks for laying it out so honestly. Now,
> you'll probably be banished back to the hell you came from...the SBIG
> group. :-) Just kidding, I really think most here are open to some CCD
> input. Someday, we'll need to put it to a vote.
> 
> Alan
> 
> 
> --- Paul Howell <paul@howell-ltd.com> wrote:
>> I am a lurker here, so most of you don't know me. I lurk
>> because most of my astrophotography is CCD based. When I
>> first started doing imaging, I discovered the APML and silly
>> me, thought that the "Astrophotography Mailing List"
>> pertained to me. Boy was I wrong. I was flummoxed then, and
>> I am flummoxed now.
>> 
>> As far as I can tell, it goes something like this:
>> 
>> 1. Film images has 'soul', CCD images do not.
>> 2. People who shoot film are somehow inherently more in
>> touch with their inner esthetic.
>> 3. CCD folks are nouveau rich impostors.
>> 4. CCD is the 'dark side'
>> 5. We've been doing this for a long time, what would you
>> know.
>> 6. CCD is so expensive, only geeky rich guys can afford it.
>> 7. CCD is so complicated, only geeky rich guys can do it.
>> 
>> I have been a professional photographer for a long time. I
>> have shot film, I have shot digitally. Nowadays, we shoot
>> virtually everything digitally. I can tell you firsthand,
>> the 'soul' in my photography was never in my film, and it
>> isn't in my CCD cameras. It's in me. This whining about CCD
>> is ludicrous.
>> 
>> As far as the cost and complication, well it is expensive
>> and more complicated than film. Get over it. So are AP
>> scopes, Paramounts etc. Many, many folks cannot afford such
>> high end equipment. Most members of my astronomy club fall
>> into this category. Maybe they should form a list called the
>> "Discussion of Astrophotography Done On Inexpensive OTAs".
>> 
>> As far as the esthetic thing goes, I think that's where I
>> get the most riled up. Sure, some CCD'ers are hacks, so are
>> some film shooters. There is however some wonderful
>> photography out there done by some very talented CCD
>> shooters. They are not hacks.
>> 
>> I wish the APML wasn't closed to my photography. I think I
>> have something I could share. So I post to the SBIG list.
>> But I must tell you, I would prefer to post (and discuss) on
>> a list that is dedicated to all forms of astrophotography,
>> regardless of camera make, method, film or CCD. The APML has
>> that potential.
>> 
>> The APML will slowly lose relevance if it does not embrace
>> new imagers, and new imaging technology. Tony said as much
>> and I agree. Only Nixon could go to China, and only Tony can
>> lay down that roadmap.
> 
> 
> 
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
> http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> Astro-Photo mailing list
> Astro-Photo@seds.org
> http://seds.org/mailman/listinfo/astro-photo
> 

_______________________________________________
Astro-Photo mailing list
Astro-Photo@seds.org
http://seds.org/mailman/listinfo/astro-photo