Re: [APML] hangin' around, was Stunned silence - Goodbye

[Sean Walker <vze2c3z8@verizon.net>]

nope, quite the opposite. there seems to be a blurring of the boundaries. I'm
happy, since i haven't put film on any of my scopes since March- all silicone.

Sean Walker

Chris & Jennifer Cook wrote:

> I have been off the list since mid last week and have missed this thread.
> What's the deal?  I saw reference to a digital camera.  I hope my digicam
> images didn't start a CCD/film war.... :-o
> Please reply off-list if you'd like.
> Thanks.
>
> Chris
>
> ==================
> Chris Cook
> http://www.abmedia.com/astro
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Gartland <mgartlan@iconn.net>
> To: astro-photo@seds.org <astro-photo@seds.org>
> Date: Monday, November 05, 2001 5:39 PM
> Subject: Re: [APML] hangin' around, was Stunned silence
>
> >Gee...I just rejoined after a lengthy hiatus and was planning on getting
> into some
> >CCD discussions....I missed the beginning of this thread or last years
> >problem...is there something I should know before I start posting about
> which  CCD
> >camera...etc
> >
> >Paul Howell wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Bert -
> >>
> >> Thanks for your reply. I hope I didn't sound whiney.
> >>
> >> > You don't need to leave---what you are hearing is only the residue of
> an
> >> > argument from a year or two ago. There doesn't seem to be nearly the
> insular
> >> > film-only feeling that we had before.
> >>
> >> Great! I'd love to participate in the group, it seems to have some of the
> >> best astrophotographers.
> >>
> >> > Some long-time film users (and very
> >> > expert ones at that) seemed to feel that since there were CCD groups in
> >> > which film wasn't mentioned (the SBIG group, I guess), there should
> damn
> >> > well be a film group in which CCD wasn't mentioned.
> >>
> >> I haven't followed the SBIG group closely, perhaps I should. I'm not
> trying
> >> to sound wry, but I assumed that the SBIG group was mostly about hardware
> >> and the APML was mostly about pictures.
> >>
> >> >The people who got
> >> > flamed then for "defending" CCD on APML are very cautious now. On the
> other
> >> > hand, people who did the flaming then have not made any recent
> objections
> >> > (as far as I know) to the rather significant comparisons of CCD and
> film
> >> > techniques and images on APML.
> >> I find it astounding that someone would get flamed - maybe I'm just a
> little
> >> dense but what is there to defend or attack? Do people get flamed over
> what
> >> choice of film they make? Good grief, it's just a light sensor. Anyway,
> I'm
> >> glad that stuff is gone now and I don't want to make a big issue over it
> >> (maybe too late already <G>).
> >> >
> >> <snip>
> >> >It would be nice to have a site where both could be discussed.
> >> Amen.
> >>
> >> -P
> >>
> >> --  APML Archives at <http://astro.umsystem.edu/apml/>  ---
> >>              Unsubscribe at <majordomo@seds.org>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >--  APML Archives at <http://astro.umsystem.edu/apml/>  ---
> >             Unsubscribe at <majordomo@seds.org>
> >
>
> --  APML Archives at <http://astro.umsystem.edu/apml/>  ---
>              Unsubscribe at <majordomo@seds.org>


--  APML Archives at <http://astro.umsystem.edu/apml/>  ---
             Unsubscribe at <majordomo@seds.org>