Here is how I spend my moonlit nights

Hi Brian, 

Some of the topics on this forum you discuss go way over my head in technical terms, but this one I feel I can contribute to. 

The list is useful particularly for those starting out and I may have had use for this info a couple of years ago when I was still imaging. I'm thankful that this site is now up and running as a better alternative for me. 

These days my take on the subject, depending on the time of year and weather, is visit a local hostelry with a garden seating area, and under the moon and stars sip one's favourite beverage or two. Unfortunately not many times a year can this take place in the UK, but definitely a recommendation if you live in sunnier and warmer climes.  

Regards, 
Ray 

Brian

its so nice to have this stuff on the forum, please keep sharing  

I love lunar

However I do have a very very soft spot for long exposure timelapse photography

Excellent stuff Brian and like Ray it does go over my head from a technical point of view, but I do have an appreciation for what you're saying and it sounds interesting. I will be keen to know of any results you come up with. Take care. Simon

Thanks, gents!

Many, many years ago at the Univ. of Arizona we learned the basics of photometry at the school's 21-inch Schmidt-Cassegrain scope on campus. As a young kid I wanted to look through the scope, so I wasn't too keen on these labs! But as I grew older I came to appreciate the technology that makes it work. Back then they used photo-multiplier tubes although I suspect they used CCDs up on Kitt Peak.

Brian

Hi Brian,
Hope is all fine where you are. I've read some interesting posts just now you've recently made here and followed a few links.

Sir you really are a font/fount of knowledge, and even if you wouldn't technically qualify as an astronomy professional, your wide range of knowledge is most definitely up there. From what I've briefly looked at you have a great way of presenting topics, with explanations that certainly help. Great having you here on the forum and I look forward to more great images from you and other members and especially the interesting subjects you bring to the forum. Alas I'm only here to inject a little bit of silliness to matters and hopefully to capture some pretty images.

Regards, 
Ray 

Thanks, Ray. My personal imaging has been limited by a number of factors:

Poor seeing conditions north of New York City. Although I have Bortle 5 skies, which isn't terrible, I have few nights per month that are suitable for imaging. Either it is outright cloudy or I have to suffer through 4 arc-second seeing.[/*]
My scope's optics aren't the best. Blue light does not focus well so blue stars suffer from bloat.[/*]
My mount is 50 years old so it has no modern go-to capability or active guiding. I did replace the right-ascension constant speed induction motor with a stepper motor and Raspberry Pi that lowers PE from 80 arc-seconds down to 10 arc-seconds. On a good setup I can achieve 120-second exposures with no active guiding. With normal LRGB astrophotography 120 seconds is close to the limit of Bortle 5.[/*]
My camera is 10 years old but I do get a lot of value for the $400 I paid for it.[/*]

It just doesn't make any sense for me to spend $10,000+ for new equipment under these conditions. Short of packing up, selling the house, and moving to the desert southwest, I think the best course is to leverage RoboScopes for AP, and use my personal scope for photometry (although I wish I had a larger aperture.)

Brian

Thank you Brian for your insights into your situation. I think what you have said is the best way to go. I have a similar issue here in the UK. The light pollution maps will tell me it is around Bortle 4 where I am, but I am absolutely certain it is not! It is around 6-7. On occasions things will slightly improved and I can see around 35 stars, whereas it's normally around 20. So I do what I can from here, and hopefully Spain will take up slack. Anyway take care, good hearing from you in recent days. Simon

Good morning Brian, 

You are posting some really great things on the forum and I would just like to say thanks for all this interesting and useful information. This in particular relates to your recent posts on estimating efficient integration times

Professor Brian Cox, astronomer and astrophysicist, became a familiar name here because of the brilliant way he could explain things. He would put across just enough information to help people understand complex concepts without boring them such that they'd switch tv channels. In that regard I'd consider you at least an equal. 

Even with a far limited knowledge and understanding  myself of the technical aspects of astrophotography, I do understand enough from those recent posts to know how useful your proposals are. Really exciting. 

A poor analogy follows.
Two cookery books from two chefs, same dish, but one requires 150 minutes and 30 ingredients, the other 120 minutes and just 14 ingredients. For purists the first recipe would be their choice. The reason the second takes less time and far less ingredients is that, the chef doesn't over complicate the recipe, simply by replacing the preparation of sauces etc with items  purchased off the shelf. Many would likely be put off by that part of the recipe. The use of off the shelf items encourage readers to actually go on and make the dish, (continue reading the article). Later if anyone develops a desire to learn more they can always try the first recipe later. Gosh what a bad explanation, Brian could do it much better for sure.  

Anyways, really appreciate your contributions to the forum Brian, and all the time and effort you put in to help us/me. 

At some time articles summarising some of the topics, such as this, would ideally appear in the Imaging Tips section in order that they don't get buried and lost in the forum as it gets ever larger. 

Best regards 
Ray