Jeremy Shears

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 7 posts - 541 through 547 (of 547 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Lyrids 2014 #576545
    Jeremy Shears
    Participant

    Oh well, Bill – at least you have have an interesting spectrum of another visitor!

    Go well!

    Jeremy

    in reply to: New Arrival #576544
    Jeremy Shears
    Participant

    Great to hear you are interested in visual variable star observations, Mike. There’s plenty of work to be done in this field. Best of luck with developing your technique – and don’t firget, if you have any questions, ask away. We’re here to help you!.

    Go well!

    Jeremy

    in reply to: Lyrids 2014 #576541
    Jeremy Shears
    Participant

    Good to see you progressing this pioneering work on meteor video spectroscopy, Bill. The Lyrids can be pretty sparse, so you did well to capture the spectrum of one.

    Go well!

    Jeremy

    in reply to: New Arrival #576532
    Jeremy Shears
    Participant

    Welcome to the BAA – I am sure you will enjoy your membership. I wish you success with your return to astronomy. 

    Glad to hear that you have an interest in variable stars – the Variable Star Section (http://www.britastro.org/vss/) is just the place to start. You are quite right that you can make a real scientific contribution in this field – the VSS has been contributing to science for 124 years! Feel free to ask any questions you might have – there are quite a few variable star observers who can help you. Are you interested in visual or CCD observing? Either way, you will have lots of targets accessible with your Celestron. You might also like to know that the Section is holding a meeting on June 21 in York – a bit of a hike for you, but worth considering.

    Go well!

    Jeremy

     

    in reply to: Fake astronomical images #576530
    Jeremy Shears
    Participant

    I don’t see a fundamental problem with composites so long as they are identified as such. People have done that with conventional photography for years. The issue is that in many cases they are not identified as such or are deliberately passed off as “real”. However, it is gratifying to see that with a bit of astronomical experience the brain can often tell immediately that “something is not right” – that’s fine for those of us who have been around for a bit, but not good for beginners, let alone the general public.

    The biggest irritation I have is that with some many wonderful sights in the night sky, why bother to fake a picture?

    Over-processed images are another matter. But what is acceptable is often in the eye of the beholder, even for “normal” astroimages. Colour selection is another matter – I, for example, am not so keen on the Hubble palette for colour images. To me it feels harsh and unreal – but what is real in terms of images that the eye cannot see in colour anyway?

    Go well!

    Jeremy

     

     

    in reply to: Winchester 2014 #576526
    Jeremy Shears
    Participant

    I couldn’t agree more, Gary. An absolutely cracking week-end. Enjoyed every minute of it, but it was over too soon.

    Good to see a few new faces – hopefully even more next year.

    Go well!

    Jeremy

    in reply to: Removing M82 from SN 2014J #576512
    Jeremy Shears
    Participant

    Nick,

    there is a thread on this topic here: http://www.aavso.org/aperture-photometry-strategy-sn-2013

    Go well!

    Jeremy

Viewing 7 posts - 541 through 547 (of 547 total)