Is this just sour grapes?

[Guest]

OK, not mentioning any names BUT ...

 

I've been rather cynical about photo competitions because they tend to favour long exposure deep sky photos. Now OK, I'm the first to admit I'd get some suitable kit if I won the lottery but I would not give up the solar and lunar stuff I do. I had a go at entering a competition because I'd caught something not quite unique but rather special.

 

Didn't come anywhere. OK, fair enough. All of the featured winners bar one were long exposure deep sky shots needing tens of thousands of pounds worth of equipment. The other one would have needed a few hundred for travel.

 

Now I'm not suggesting for one minute that if everyone had a 999mm APO with a fuel-injected, turbo-charged mount they'd take amazing shots but (to me) it rather puts the competition out of the reach of the equipmentally challenged. I've seen some great photos of the Moon, Sun and planets, not to mention some constellation shots. I'm a great fan of Mark Townley's solar shots and you only need single figure thousands for those.

[Tweedledee]

I suppose people are always going to favour those deep images showing stars down past 20th magnitude and virtually resolving grains of interstellar dust.

 

Whatever you've captured Phil, I'm sure we'd all like to see it here on EMS. 

[Daz Type-R]

Im afraid I think that's just the way it is, expensive kit capable of very long exsposures brings out the really faint detail that gives people the WOW factor.

 

Thats why I like our POtM compition, it's not just the expensive kit that gets mentioned, take Decembers POtM winner, good old lunar shot taken with a 200P dobsonion and a cannon DSLR, you don't get much cheaper than that.

 

 

 

[Guest]

41 minutes ago, Daz Type-R said:

Im afraid I think that's just the way it is, expensive kit capable of very long exsposures brings out the really faint detail that gives people the WOW factor.

 

Thats why I like our POtM compition, it's not just the expensive kit that gets mentioned, take Decembers POtM winner, good old lunar shot taken with a 200P dobsonion and a cannon DSLR, you don't get much cheaper than that.

 

 

 

Well you can get cheaper if you use a compact digital camera or webcam.

 

Yes, one reason I like EMS is that we cover all genres of astrophotography.

[Guest]

46 minutes ago, Tweedledee said:

I suppose people are always going to favour those deep images showing stars down past 20th magnitude and virtually resolving grains of interstellar dust.

 

Whatever you've captured Phil, I'm sure we'd all like to see it here on EMS. 

I post everything on my blog but just the "best of" stuff here. I like to think I do a lot with the kit I've got but there are many others who take good and interesting photos without tens of thousands of pounds worth of gear.

 

More to encourage others, I find a lot to photograph without doing long exposures. I got a DSLR with zoom lens and it has opened up a new universe to me.

 

Only thing I do is shoot lots of lights and darks and put them through DSS or Microsoft ICE.

[Werisit]

I think I've said this before on here but, you'll always find someone who can do it (what ever it is) better, faster, bigger what ever. So What!! If you (and I) enjoy taking photographs, processing them (something to do on a cloudy night) and showing them to friends, or just looking through a file of your images and thinking "I did that" then keep on trukin. You'll get better results the more practice you get and we all like to see the fruits of your labour on here. 

[red dwalf]

You certainly don't need expensive equipment costing thousands of pounds, a tracking mount, a dlsr and a good lens is virtual all you need, ive seen some stunning shots taken with equipment like this.

[catman161]

It's funny Phil. Being just into planetary and Lunar imaging myself I love looking at the deep sky images and must admit that getting a "wow" factor deep sky image is actually more achievable for an amateur than getting a "wow" factor planetary image.

However I agree with the above sentiments. If we enjoy what we're doing and strive to get better the satisfaction comes from the process of doing all that, that involves.

I had something pop up in an app I have called Timehop that really made me smile the other day. It showed a side along comparison of my first ever image I took of Jupiter with a 200P and neq6 and a simple SPC900NC webcam and a more recent shot with my Planeta and an ASI120MC (still a very affordable camera to an amateur astronomer) and it re-ignited my interest and motivation in getting my setup back up and running (that's a whole other story!). My point is, whatever we do it is good to look at it as doing it for ourselves and if we were to enter a competition or two along the way and place in it, then that is just a bonus

Here's the comparison pic that flashed up on my timeline the other day that I mentioned above.

[Guest]

On ‎19‎/‎02‎/‎2016 at 12:21, catman161 said:

It's funny Phil. Being just into planetary and Lunar imaging myself I love looking at the deep sky images and must admit that getting a "wow" factor deep sky image is actually more achievable for an amateur than getting a "wow" factor planetary image.

However I agree with the above sentiments. If we enjoy what we're doing and strive to get better the satisfaction comes from the process of doing all that, that involves.

I had something pop up in an app I have called Timehop that really made me smile the other day. It showed a side along comparison of my first ever image I took of Jupiter with a 200P and neq6 and a simple SPC900NC webcam and a more recent shot with my Planeta and an ASI120MC (still a very affordable camera to an amateur astronomer) and it re-ignited my interest and motivation in getting my setup back up and running (that's a whole other story!). My point is, whatever we do it is good to look at it as doing it for ourselves and if we were to enter a competition or two along the way and place in it, then that is just a bonus

Here's the comparison pic that flashed up on my timeline the other day that I mentioned above.

I totally agree. I would haven't had sour grapes if they had some photos that could be done on a lower budget. I would have said "OK, same genre but theirs was better than mine or was judged to be of more interest to the public".

[Guest]

A similar discussion kicked off on Facebook today. Someone was told how to improve their image and they recommended equipment as expensive as a new family car.

[Guest]

Nice to see NASA's APOD editors have been following this thread:

 

http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/astropix.html

[Sheila]

Well as I started with a DSLR on an NEQ5 mount with my deep sky imaging and no telescope, I think I can comment from both

perspectives (now I have expensive stuff too  ).  My favourite image of any of mine was the NGC7000 i did at my first Kellling  (NEQ5  Canon 40D and a 200mm lens)

I enjoy the deep sky stuff and as you say it is easy to get hooked on your subject.   As for expensive equipment, it does not follow that you produce good material.  In fact possibly a lot of the time the opposite is true.

 

I am sure you have all seen me trying for hours to get the kit to co operate in the middle of a field   Not an

easy task by any means.

 

If you love a subject then you tend to put as many resources into it as you can over a period.  Everyone does as

much as they can and I do find that most serious sites take account of the equipment used to produce the image, I

certainly do when judging picture of the month.

[andyboy1970]

I had the same feeling earlier this month.

I entered the Atik imaging competition (Atik/Artemis cameras only) with my humble images from my 16Hr osc and found quite a few people using 16ic's posting cracking images. The top prize was a new Atik 4120ex camera. The guy that won was using an ATik one 6.0 camera.

I was left thinking does this guy really need a new camera, surely it was easier to capture with a DSLR size sensor than us minions with small chip cameras.

If I had been a judge my thoughts would have taken me back to how much of a struggle deep sky was with a webcam then how much easier it was with a DSLR and finally how good is the image in relation to the equipment used. 

[Werisit]

8 hours ago, andyboy1970 said:

I had the same feeling earlier this month.

I entered the Atik imaging competition (Atik/Artemis cameras only) with my humble images from my 16Hr osc and found quite a few people using 16ic's posting cracking images. The top prize was a new Atik 4120ex camera. The guy that won was using an ATik one 6.0 camera.

I was left thinking does this guy really need a new camera, surely it was easier to capture with a DSLR size sensor than us minions with small chip cameras.

If I had been a judge my thoughts would have taken me back to how much of a struggle deep sky was with a webcam then how much easier it was with a DSLR and finally how good is the image in relation to the equipment used. 

Seems a bit back to front really doesn't it Andy. Maybe the prize should be awarded to the worst image!?

[andyboy1970]

2 hours ago, Werisit said:

Seems a bit back to front really doesn't it Andy. Maybe the prize should be awarded to the worst image!?

I suppose they were just judging the image rather than technical ability!