David Levy moving to Astronomy

On Jan 4, 3:06 am, "Curtis Croulet"
wrote:
With a new Editor-in-Chief at S&T, perhaps a new team is being
assembled.

I had a long chat with S&T's new editor, Bob Naeye, at the Pacific Astronomy
and Telescope Show in September. I told him that this past summer was the
first time in almost 50 years that I considered not renewing my
subscription. I felt that S&T had become too much like Astronomy. Whatever
the merits of Astronomy or lack thereof, there's no point in my getting two
versions of the same magazine.

I let both subscriptions lapse a few years ago. I had been an S&T
subscriber for decades. Somehow both mags had managed to take a
fascinating subject and find a way to make it boring.

Quadibloc wrote:
On Jan 3, 8:56 am, "George Normandin"
wrote:
What's happening here?

I know that Sky and Telescope occasionally tries to move itself
towards a more popular orientation - to catch up with Astronomy
magazine. So maybe by being the more respected and technical
publication it is at a disadvantage.

Also, Meade used to buy several pages of ads in every issue, and now
doesn't do that anymore - so Sky and Telescope shrank recently.

Perhaps, what with the tight economy, the magazine is under some
pressure. But that doesn't mean it's necessarily in serious trouble.

John Savard
Times are a changin'. I'm pretty sure Meade is having a difficult time, and
that didn't start last year. Spokespeople for the magazine have attended the
SAS meeting in Big Bear each year, and they explain the readership, and
possibly the amateur community, as tilted to older folks--with money.
However, that's shrinking, and I don't mean because of the present financial
difficulty of the world. The question is how do you appeal to newcomers?

--
W. eWatson

(121.015 Deg. W, 39.262 Deg. N) GMT-8 hr std. time)
Obz Site: 39° 15' 7" N, 121° 2' 32" W, 2700 feet

Web Page: www.speckledwithstars.net/

On Jan 3, 10:56*am, "George Normandin"
wrote:
From the latest (Jan 2nd, 2009) "Astronomy" magazine news letter: "In
January 2009 world-renowned amateur astronomer and comet discoverer David H.
Levy joins Astronomy magazine as a Contributing Editor. Levy will write a
monthly column.."

First Stephen James O'Meara 'jumped ship' from S&T and moved to Astronomy
and now Levy. What's happening here?

George N

I would move to if it was more $$$. I did that in the sign industry.
worked for the highest bidder.

On Jan 4, 2:06 am, "Curtis Croulet"
wrote:

I had a long chat with S&T's new editor, Bob Naeye, at the Pacific Astronomy
and Telescope Show in September. I told him that this past summer was the
first time in almost 50 years that I considered not renewing my
subscription. I felt that S&T had become too much like Astronomy. Whatever
the merits of Astronomy or lack thereof, there's no point in my getting two
versions of the same magazine. Bob told me to expect some forthcoming
changes to S&T. There'll be more on astrophotography in the magazine
(techniques & equipment, not pictures), and more of the main articles will
be written by scientists rather than editors. However, he denied that the
magazine has been "dumbed down" in recent years. His editorial in the Feb
'09 issue conforms to this view.


After reading Naeye's editorial I got as far as typing up nasty
letter, putting it in an envelope and putting a stamp on. I may mail
the letter, but I doubt this fool will care whether a 44 year
subscriber continues his subscription or not. I have 44 years bound
Sky and Telescope's on my bookshelf and I often refer to them,
particularly the Deep Sky Wonders and Telescope Making articles. It is
very clear that Seronik has dumbed down the telescope making section
compared to Bob Cox. Indeed Seronik has done more harm than good.
Saying that nobody builds their own scopes any more is foolish as a
quick search on the web will prove. Seronik's job is to encourage to
make people feel that it is impossible. Sue French has been able to
salvage Deep Sky Wonders, but I'm afraid she won't be around along. As
far as more astrophotography: I wonder just how many people can afford
a $1300 CCD camera and a $1500 mount (Orion prices) to make a 8 hour
exposure at an increasing rare dark site two hours from home . Looks
like Sky and Telescope is going to die off.

On 4 Éáí, 20:41, wrote:

After reading Naeye's editorial I got as far as typing up nasty
letter, putting it in an envelope and putting a stamp on. I may mail
the letter, but I doubt this fool will care whether a 44 year
subscriber continues his subscription or not. I have 44 years bound
Sky and Telescope's on my bookshelf and I often refer to them,
particularly the Deep Sky Wonders and Telescope Making articles. It is
very clear that Seronik has dumbed down the telescope making section
compared to Bob Cox. Indeed Seronik has done more harm than good.
Saying that nobody builds their own scopes any more is foolish as a
quick search on the web will prove. Seronik's job is to encourage to
make people feel that it is impossible. Sue French has been able to
salvage Deep Sky Wonders, but I'm afraid she won't be around along. As
far as more astrophotography: I wonder just how many people can afford
a $1300 CCD camera and a $1500 mount (Orion prices) to make a 8 hour
exposure at an increasing rare dark site two hours from home . Looks
like Sky and Telescope is going to die off.

Personally I am not worried about the $1300 CCD camera and/or the
$1500 mount ... these prices are peanuts ... but what worries me is
the degradation in the weather. For me personally, winters are out the
window as far as imaging is concerned which means I have a six-month
window of opportunity to do my work (April through October) each year.
My belief is that the weather is the real threat to astronomy (amateur
and ground-based professional).

No matter how good your equipment may be and how good your seeing and
lack of light pollution may also be, it means didley squat if the
clear skies are not there to allow one to spend a few quality hours
under the night sky.

It has been five to six weeks and I have yet to manage a mere 2-hr
window so that I can at least pursue an open cluster. Predictions for
the next ten days are more of the same: clouds and rains.

I am happy to see S&T take a more serious look at astrophotography.
Take one look at the forums and you will see that a serious amount of
bandwidth does indeed involve astrophotography.

As for S&T, I have also noted a decline in the quality and, in fact, I
find myself spending more time reading my monthly issue of Astronomy
than S&T. I have never been a fan of David Levy and, therefore, I feel
indifferent where he ends up.

Anthony.

On Sun, 4 Jan 2009 10:41:41 -0800 (PST), wrote:

I have 44 years bound
Sky and Telescope's on my bookshelf and I often refer to them,
particularly the Deep Sky Wonders and Telescope Making articles...

Saying that nobody builds their own scopes any more is foolish as a
quick search on the web will prove...

Of course there are still people building telescopes. But this
represents a tiny fraction of the "market" for amateur astronomy. I know
many amateur astronomers, and only a small fraction have any interest in
ATM. This has become a specialty area, and it probably makes good sense
to pare it down or eliminate it in a mainstream publication.

far as more astrophotography: I wonder just how many people can afford
a $1300 CCD camera and a $1500 mount (Orion prices) to make a 8 hour
exposure at an increasing rare dark site two hours from home...

I'd say most. Imaging is increasingly the focus of amateur astronomers.
Equipment is better and cheaper all the time. And of great importance,
imaging does not require dark sites, unlike viewing. People are getting
great results in the middle of cities. So for a popular astronomy
magazine, shifting the emphasis from visual to imaging would seem to
make good sense.

Obviously, this is going to shut out a certain percentage of
astronomers, but I think it will open up the publication to even more.
Amateur astronomy today is more popular than it ever was, and it is also
very different than it was 30 years ago. For the magazines to survive,
they need to follow the market.
_________________________________________________

Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com

"Curtis Croulet" wrote.....
....
I know nothing about the status of David Levy with S&T -- whether he's
moving totally to Astronomy or doing both mags. I see him annually at the
Starry Nights Festival in Yucca Valley, and he said nothing about it this
last time. But I suppose he would not have been at liberty to say
anything at the time.
--
Curtis Croulet

On Cloudy Nights Mr. Naeye just posted that Levy will still be an assistant
editor for S&T, and he will be doing a new blog on their website, but will
no longer do the monthly column.



While David's "move" could be related to "opportunity" at Astronomy, it
might also relate to health issues or some other personal issue having
nothing to do with the relative status of the two magazines.



George Normandin

"W. eWatson" wrote
.....
Times are a changin'. ......
...... The question is how do you appeal to newcomers?

--
W. eWatson

Good question. A few years ago S&T tried to publish a new "beginners"
magazine that I thought was pretty good, or at least the two issues I read
were. However, nobody bought it off the news stands, so it died.



George Normandin

On Jan 4, 2:59*pm, Anthony Ayiomamitis wrote:
Personally I am not worried about the $1300 CCD camera and/or the
$1500 mount ... these prices are peanuts ...

Peanuts?!? Maybe for Donald Trump - $2800 is three months' pay for me.

Saying that nobody builds their own scopes any more is foolish as a
quick search on the web will prove.

Because they don't. RTMC was established to showcase amateur-built scopes,
but it's now RTMC Astronomy Expo, because the homebuilt scopes have almost
disappeared. I'd really like to see some of those extraordinary scopes from
years ago, but they aren't there.

As far as more astrophotography: I wonder just how many people can afford
a $1300 CCD camera and a $1500 mount (Orion prices) to make a 8 hour
exposure at an increasing rare dark site two hours from home .

I gather you've never actually tried any astrophotography.
--
Curtis Croulet
Temecula, California
33°27'59"N, 117°05'53"W