As I suggested, attend the “Advanced Imaging Conference” in San Jose in November. You will meet quite a few of these folks. You will also learn a LOT about imaging and meet some cool folks. There are folks in any hobby with a butt load of money. A few of the imagers are Silicon Valley entrepreneurs and as a result have the tech ability, the interest, AND the money for this. I would agree in some ways they are not true amateurs if they spend that kind of money on the hobby but if the definition of amateur is “not-for-profit”, then even big buck types qualify because they are not making money from their images (few do).

“You have to admit, though, that there are people out there with more money than sense who simply buy the most expensive equipment they can find because they think it will guarantee good results. Don’t say there aren’t, cause I’ve met ‘em.”

It is not all about equipment. Good equipment still needs good setup and good operation which require skill and experience. You can’t just buy or rent the equipment and get good results unless you rent a scope that others have set up (but then they are not truly your images, IMHO – setup and operation are a BIG part of the process). Good equipment and a poor operator = poor data and poor data = poor images.

Basically there are two parts to a good image:

1) Good data which comes from a good operator, well made, precise equipment, and good sky conditions.

2) Good processing which comes from decent software and knowledge and experience.

Any good image w/o all of the above is simply an aberrant fluke and will be rare.

I’ll watch this space to see if anybody succeeded in submitting.

I think the fact is that most amateurs can’t afford to spend $25K+ on equipment because, well, they’re amateurs. i.e. someone who does something they love in their spare time while balancing the hobby with a job, kids, mortgage, etc, etc.

I know a handful of amateur astrophotographers who do serious work (the kind of people CCDMan is talking about), and none of them would agree with DavidLee. These are the kind of people who have an obsession with this hobby. They spend thousands upon thousands of dollars on this equipment, not only on the optics, but also on the PC’s, software, hardware, observatories (remote, and on-site), land, buildings, metal-fab equipment, etc etc. Generally, the people who are willing to spend this kind of money want to make sure they know how to get results. Hence, they get those results more often than they don’t.

@DavidLee “But some of us have learned how to do GREAT work with much less…..sometimes even BETTER than what comes out of top-notch equipment. Just because an astrophotographer owns that stuff, doesn’t mean he can take good images with it.”

Tripe. The people who take crap astro shots with Celestron/Meade VASTLY outnumber the people who take even sub-par shots with the high-end stuff, even after adjusting for the higher numbers of people with low-end equipment.

The fact is, the people who buy expensive equipment more often than not have a drive to create high quality images. They are not limited by their equipment, they are limited by their own ability to learn to use it. People who buy Celestron or Meade may have the same drive, but they ARE limited by their equipment, as well as their ability to learn to use it.