RE: (OT) Re: [APML] Long vs. Stacked Short Exposures

["Greg Hartke" <ghartke@adelphia.net>]

Hi, Ray,

Interesting you should ask that. Most of the folks with whom I went to
graduate school were amateurs before they were professionals. A bunch of us
had built our own telescopes, too. Some of my graduate school compatriots:
Richard Barvainis is the Program Director for the Division of Astronomical
Sciences for NSF and he recently pulled out his old telescope, cleaned the
mirror, and had a blast. A couple of months ago, John Bally had a short
piece in S&T. (John's at Univ. of Colorado, IIRC.) John was the most ardent
amateur I've ever seen. I had the second best eyes in the department but I
was nothing against the legendary "Bally eyes". John and I went hunting
Pluto's moon with the 18" Clark refractor at Amherst College shortly after
the moon was discovered because there was speculation that it could be seen
with a scope of that size. Unfortunately it couldn't be seen but it was cool
to try. Bill Waller has had a couple of recent articles in S&T and curiously
I don't remember him being much of an amateur. I know a bunch of guys at
STScI who have continued doing amateur astronomy. Then again, my Ph.D.
thesis advisor (George Greenstein, son of the late, great Jesse Greenstein)
knew about 5 constellations in total. Alice Harding is a wheel in High
Energy Astrophysics and was another fine amateur. Dan Clemens at Boston
University was the odd example (in our department) of someone who wasn't an
amateur at all. Tom Balonek (Colgate) was and is a very enthusiastic
amateur. Most of these were observationalists were doing radio astronomy in
those days but most of us had a blast with the availability of the 18" Clark
and a Boller and Chivens 16" Cassegrain. My career has been in physics but
I've remained an amateur astronomer throughout. The bottom line, of course,
is that amateur and professional astronomy are very different animals. I
remember getting my students all excited once when I was able to show them
(in the 18") a supernova in M100. What a blast! Heck, we wouldn't be
scientists if it wasn't fun (we were never in it for the high pay, nor the
sterling hours) and amateur astronomy is still fun. It's hard to believe I
got my first scope when I was 12 in 1967 and I'm still at it. Back then, it
was the thrill of the chase. (At least it was for me). It's different now.
You change the game to keep it fresh but it's still fun.

Is your experience different, Ray? It didn't use to be unusual to be both a
professional and an amateur but times change, I guess.

Regards,

Greg Hartke
Sykesville, MD

-----Original Message-----
From: astro-photo-bounces@seds.org
[mailto:astro-photo-bounces@seds.org]On Behalf Of Ray Butler
Sent: Friday, August 13, 2004 10:56 AM
To: Discussion of Film Astrophotography
Subject: (OT) Re: [APML] Long vs. Stacked Short Exposures

Do people ever find it strange that you do both "professional" and
"amateur" astronomy? I get that reaction sometimes from my colleagues,
in fact, it's why I've generally kept my amateur activities quiet. They
can fall into two categories...people who ask "but why would you want to
spend your precious free time on the same stuff as work?" (but as you
know, it is soooooo different to work; it is pure fun!)...and people who
dismiss the amateur side as a waste of time because it can't possibly
answer their search for scientific truths. The latter type tend not to
have an eye for the beauty of astronomy, unless it is in the form of an
equation or graph. Oh well; I can see beauty and fulfillment in both
aspects - capturing the aesthetic and revealing the scientific; so if
they can only see it in one aspect, it's their loss.

Ray "oops, feeling smug now, better stop that" Butler


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