[sac-forum] The Problem with Imaging
- From: "KenGSikes" <kengsikes@xxxxxxx>
- To: "SAC Mail List" <sac-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "EVAC" <evac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "AZ Observing List" <az-observing@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2014 18:41:00 -0700
Ok, I know I am about to start a firestorm, but I am going to do it any way.
Back in the 70's and 80's if one took a picture through a telescope the film
used was usually Tri-X, Kodachrome, or Ectachrome , or if one had the recourses
one of the Kodak 103 films. The Kodak films were 103aE, 103aO and 103aF.
Bill Anderson and I were lucky that we had purchased each of the 103 films in
a 100 foot rolls. Bill had the capabilities of re-packaging the film in 36
exposursure rolls. We did all kinds of experiments using the film.
At this point Bill and Developed what we called the Astro Camera ( See the Dec
issue of Sky & Telescope 1980 or 1981 for this article) Believe me we go way
back, self film development ( D 19 , Microdol, Diafine we tried it all ( D19
Worked best with the 103 films.)
Now to my point.....In the early days of astrophotography what one got on B & W
FILM is what was really there. Look at the past issues of S & T and you will
see what I mean REAL pictures (Bill I hope you will jump in here and help me)
I am not belittling CCD photography, but today Astrophotography is basically
make it look the way you want it to look. Albert takes alot of pictures, as do
others. Each uses different pallets for color definition as the owner sees fit
and produces great pictures.
Personally, I do not look at the CCD image as I cannot see that object in that
color in my telescope and I delete the post. This is not meant to demean what
others do , but to keep in the realm of reality as I see it.
Ken Sikes
Other related posts:
