Alternative ways to become an observer
Many people have become interested in astronomical observing. In fact, one might argue that what a person finds appealing about astronomical observing is unique and different for everyone. Thus, while some approaches work for some people, they don't work for all.
Now to point out the obvious, if you have found this page, you likely have seen the page stargazing and initial experiences this is my personal recommended advice for a prospective observer. Amoung the many approaches that people have used only the first really seems a senseable way to begin an observer. Many of the following break one or more of the five guidlelines for beginning astronomy, stargazing#The five senseable guidelines for beginning astronomy
- Learn_from_other_amateur_astronomers. found here: Learn from other amateur astronomers I agree An amateur astronomy can in a short amount of time, guide you through the pertinent constellations and introduce you to their interests. Many serious amateurs have spent a considerable amount of money on specialized equiptment. Groups of amatuers often host star parties that give allow you to see and learn many different things. In short, experienced amateur astronomers can allow you to learn and observe things that you would spend a great deal of money and time learning and help you progress through the hobby much more quickly. --JoliePA 03:32, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
- buying expensive computer controlled telescopes. I disagree because you will spend a great deal of time learning how to use the telescope before you can even observe through it. Then after all that time, what if you don't find it interesting? you might waste alot of time and money.--JoliePA 03:52, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
- buying Inexpensive computer controlled telescopes. I disagree because many of the major telescope manufacturers have realized that in the hopes of providing sales that they will have to appeal to a broader group of people. There are many people who want to observe cool things without taking the time and effort to learn to observe. sadly, much of this equiptment if very difficult to use; often shaky, the computer controls are hopelessly cryptic, if the user ever gets to see out of it, he is very likely to be greatly dissapointed by the tiny, uninteresting view. --JoliePA 03:52, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
- checking out the most spectacular image taken from the hubble (or anyother giant telescope) and asking someone to show you this 'stunning' view. I disagree because one reason the Hubble is so unique is that it shows astronomers thing they could not hope to see with there own eyes. All modern imaging telescopes can remain fixed on a distant sight and accumulate light (on film and on CCD), a trick no eye can match. With no atmosphere to absorb dim objects and no shakiness to the atmosphere, the hubble can see incredibly dim and small sights. What is a spectacular sight with your eyes, might not even been imaged by the hubble and even if it is, your view will be so much more limited its best Not to ruin what you can see, but staring at an image of what you can't.--JoliePA 03:52, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
- diving right into imaging (astrophotography). I disagree because Imaging is expensive, time consuming and technical. While carefully looking at an object is the heart of visual astronomy; utilizing expensive equiptement is the heart of imaging. It is my opinion that beginning imaging before you know what is out there and how to find it, is simply trying to do much all at once. Once you know a little of what there is and how to find it. You can reinvent your hobby, spend a large fortune on equiptment, on concentrate on new challenges. --JoliePA 03:52, 14 November 2008 (UTC)