[APML] Perspective on CCD postings

["Bobby Middleton" <bobm@koyote.com>]

I don't want to drag this on so I am posting this with hopes that any
responses to be sent to me privately. I am also attempting to forward this
to all who made list notice of their un-subscribing.

I have some real problems with what's happening here.

As to several comments from those who are unhappy because all "mediums are
not accepted here".
Well, CCD and digital posts were being accepted here. And still are. Gene,
correct me if there has been any policy change to the permission of CCD (and
digital camera) posts that were labeled "OT"

These posts have the caveat that RELEVANT PROCESSING STEPS WERE TO BE
INCLUDED. To me (and to make it relevant to film imaging which is what this
list is about) the relevant processing steps should directly correlate to
FILM POST PROCESSING TECHNIQUES. Many CCD processing steps do; such as
anti-vignetting and flat fielding, etc. The focus of allowing these CCD
posts; however, should be that it might be possible to improve FILM IMAGING
TECHNIQUES using the same tools. If that is not the focus of these posts
then they are really not relevant to film imaging and really have no place
on this film list. That is why I made the comment about having second
thoughts about allowing the CCD posts to continue. Because I believe that a
majority of the CCD image posts were not made with this motive in mind.

There's nothing wrong at all with posting notice of a hard-won image that a
person is proud of. I do it all the time. But the direction that APML was
(is) headed was to embrace the digital postings in a way that was not
relevant to film imaging. And the digital image postings were close to
becoming a majority as opposed film image postings. That is certainly a sign
of the times as digital imaging becomes the mainstream and film imaging is
probably most certainly to become a dinosaur. (Some would say it already
is).  However, that trend will make APML "just another CCD list".  And there
are several ccd lists now to accommodate various subgroups of digital
imaging. But there is only ONE ASTRO FILM LIST.

There have been some great CCD images posted to this list made by some
world-class imagers. A portion of these image posts had some relevance to
techniques that can improve film imaging techniques and a portion did not.
That is what needs to change IMHO. It needs to be FILM RELEVANT to be
posted. Again, this is the only film list there is and it is in danger of
having more posts concerning CCD imaging than film imaging. That is the
reason those who speak our mind about the list's direction are questioning
the value of CCD posts.

There have been one or two individuals who said things that were uncalled
for. The rest of the posts with comments that question the validity of CCD
postings on this list were all relevant and not malicious. People should be
tolerant of our right to express that opinion. Those who have unsubscribed
because of a "percieved malice toward CCD imaging by some" have unsubscribed
under a mistaken belief. But you must understand our concern about the
direction the APML is headed under the present inertia it has.

To sum up my thoughts:
I have not had and still do not have a problem with CCD postings THAT ARE
FILM RELEVANT. If it is not film relevant, then I think it is out of place
on this APML list. If the APML list members can agree with that and gently
remind newcomers when their CCD postings are not quite film relevant, then
we might be able to get past this ongoing problem. The moderator (Gene I
appreciate all your hard work) might need to be tho one who does this
off-list. These are my convictions, and my hopes are that APML can be a
continuing and even a thriving internet resource for those who still want to
use film for astro imaging.
Bobby Middleton


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