Tim Auton wrote:
wrote:
Pete Lawrence wrote:
On 15 Jun 2005 09:19:14 -0700, wrote:

A better approach would be to offer some words of encouragement and
suggestions for improvement.

An even better approach would be to improve a bit then post images.

It depends on how you perceive why people post. If you think it's
because they are saying - "Hey look at my image it's the best there
is" then I would agree. However, most post because they are proud of
what they have done but would welcome constructive criticism. There
are different levels of competence and different interpretations of
quality. I think most would be agreeable to a bit of advice and
pointing in the right direction - I know I am.

Well, I guess we see things in a rather different way, shall I say. I'm
always astonished by people lack of self-criticism (or they won't post
such horrors).

I'm astonished at how some people can only judge others by their own
standards.

Do you judge people by someone-else's standard???

I expect your images are **** compared to Hubble's, but you
carry on.

They're pretty nice for a 0.2m UK lowland-based scope under a thick
atmosphere compared to a 2.5m scope hanging out there in the void.

OTOH, those (posted) images are **** any way you look at them.

Why do you bother imaging when you can see something better
on the web from Hubble, Keck or any number of bigger and better scopes
than you can ever hope to own?

Because I haven't got an Hubble or Keck to play with. I just have few
lousy aperture-challenged scopes you see...


Perfection may be the ultimate aim (up there with world peace and a
cure for cancer), but that doesn't mean we can't take pleasure in
creating something we know is imperfect, but which is an improvement
over what we did last week.

And you have to dump it over here?

Andrea T.