A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » Amateur Astronomy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Reverse Snobbery



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old July 22nd 03, 04:36 PM
Davoud
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Reverse Snobbery

Scribe2b:
there should be a marathon.
who can find the most faint fuzzies with the cheapest equipment?


*****

B-o-r-i-n-g!

But I will note that an anti-snobbery photographer whom I know, and who
used 8X10 view cameras for commercial and industrial work, once did a
one-man show in a prominent gallery in which he displayed fine quality
11x14 images made with the cheapest Kodak Instamatic that he could
find.

Davoud

--
usenet *at* davidillig dawt com
  #2  
Old July 22nd 03, 05:09 PM
Jon Isaacs
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Reverse Snobbery

there should be a marathon.
who can find the most faint fuzzies with the cheapest equipment?
KEWL
jc


A couple of years ago J. Reynolds Freeman did the Hershel 400 or some such
thing with a 50mm refractor.

Of course in the 1700's a French fellow did the complete Messier (true) list
with a scope so bad that not even Bushnell, Simmons or Tasco would try to sell
it. It took him most of his life but he did it. Of course he was blessed with
darker skies.
g

Jon
  #4  
Old July 22nd 03, 06:17 PM
bwhiting
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Reverse Snobbery

Plus Bill, there would be the factor of young eyes vs. the 60 year
old eyes....the younger the eyes, that would be the automatic
winner! At 60+, I'll give up right now! (or just won't participate).
TW.





Bill Meyers wrote:
I believe this is logically impossible. I believe that you can't
maximize two components of a system in this way, unless they correlated
at 1.0 You can however ask the question, who can find the faintest
fuzzies with a given level of equipment, or you can ask the question who
can find a given magnitude of faint fuzzies with the cheapest equipment.

It's the same fallacy as the best car for the least money.
I suppose you could try to get around it with a ratio of fuzzieness to
cheapness and try to maximize this.
Bill Meyers

Scribe2b wrote:


there should be a marathon.
who can find the most faint fuzzies with the cheapest equipment?
KEWL
jc




  #5  
Old July 22nd 03, 08:30 PM
Jon Isaacs
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Reverse Snobbery

Plus Bill, there would be the factor of young eyes vs. the 60 year
old eyes....the younger the eyes, that would be the automatic
winner! At 60+, I'll give up right now! (or just won't participate).
TW.


Yeah, but think of all that experience your have, heck, even if you can't see
M74 you can imagine it right there where it is!

Maybe this is the time for sort of an Astrovestion of "Junkyard wars" or
whatever that show is was.

How about building a Newtonian with one of the magnifying bathroom mirrors,
their about $20 and around 6 inches in diameter.

Secondary might be a pocket mirror or some such thing...

Eyepieces, maybe cheat here, at least at first, and use a real Kellner or maybe
even a Plossl, after all every scope comes with a 25mm Plossl.

jon
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:15 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.