Jupiter sketch versus photo.

[John Baars]

On 12 november 2022 I sketched Jupiter. As a sketcher it is always interesting to know what one has missed. Luckily one of the members of the Dutch Astroforum made a photograph around the same time through a C11 at f/20. He was not amused by the rather severe seeing, neither was I for that matter.
He gave permission to use his photograph for comparison with the sketch.

Hereby the result:

Photo with consent of MarioM, Astroforum.nl

It is obvious which details were missed while sketching, which I had trouble with, and which are the same. Overall, the similarities are quite decent anyway.

[Unitron48]

Great similarity, I'd say. Well done, John.

Dave

[Butterfly Maiden]

Yes, as you said John there are some differences, but still pretty good rendition from you :smile:

Not bad at all

[Juno16]

John,

That is an absolutely fantastic sketch! The details that you captured in your sketch are fabulous! Great work!

[messier 111]

fine work , thx .

[helicon]

Very close to what is seen in the photo....!

[Makuser]

Hi John. Well you did a great job of transferring your eyepiece view onto the sketch paper. Your perception was very much like the image from MarioM. Very nice art work John so keep at it.

[Bigzmey]

These is great comparison. Thanks for posting it John! I believe observing planets is an acquired skill like galaxy hunting or double splitting. The more you focus the more details one can resolve.

[John Baars]

Great similarity, I'd say. Well done, John.

Dave

Thanks Dave.

Yes, as you said John there are some differences, but still pretty good rendition from you :smile:

Not bad at all

Thanks Vanessa. Yes, I thought as much.

John,

That is an absolutely fantastic sketch! The details that you captured in your sketch are fabulous! Great work!

Thanks, The seeing didn't make it easier. I think with better seeing the turbulent area near the GRS would have been more precise.

fine work , thx .

Thank you!

Very close to what is seen in the photo....!

Thanks, it is clear that some details should have been more exaggerated.

Hi John. Well you did a great job of transferring your eyepiece view onto the sketch paper. Your perception was very much like the image from MarioM. Very nice art work John so keep at it.

Thanks, I'll keep to it.

These is great comparison. Thanks for posting it John! I believe observing planets is an acquired skill like galaxy hunting or double splitting. The more you focus the more details one can resolve.

Observing planets, i.e. noticing minuscule details and contrasts on a tiny ball is indeed a skill in itself. Just magnifying the sphere doesn't help.

[Richard]

I thing its pretty good certainly 100% better than I could ever do

[PeterD]

John, that is an excellent sketch. Just wondering, what was the scope/eyepiece you used for this one?

[John Baars]

John, that is an excellent sketch. Just wondering, what was the scope/eyepiece you used for this one?

Thanks.
What I used:
The telescope was a 120 mm f/7.5 SW Evostar.
Diagonal, a Baader BBHS mirror.
Eyepiece, a Leica ASPH 17.8- 8.9 mm zoom.
A Vixen DX barlow 2X.
I used an Atmospheric Dispersion Corrector as well.
Last but certainly not least, an experienced eye.
Each in its own makes only a very slight difference, but the team as a whole does the job.

[Lady Fraktor]

Another excellent observation and sketch John.
You have managed to capture the details nicely on the comparison.

[Bigzmey]

John, that is an excellent sketch. Just wondering, what was the scope/eyepiece you used for this one?

Thanks.
What I used:
The telescope was a 120 f/7.5 mm SW Evostar.
Diagonal, a Baader BBHS mirror.
Eyepiece, a Leica ASPH 17.8- 8.9 mm zoom.
A Vixen DX barlow 2X.
I used an Atmospheric Dispersion Corrector as well.
Last but certainly not least, an experienced eye.
Each in its own makes only a very slight difference, but the team as a whole does the job.

Hi John. To follow up on the Atmospheric Dispersion Corrector. Do you always use it, or only when the dispersion is easily detectable by eye?

[John Baars]

To follow up on the Atmospheric Dispersion Corrector. Do you always use it, or only when the dispersion is easily detectable by eye?

Hi, I only use it when dispersion is apparent. It really makes some difference, it puts blue and red waves back to where they belong. As a result details become a bit easier to spot. I always describe it as if a very thin veil is pulled away.

[mariosi]

S-U-P-E-R-B !

[Falcon 63]

Excellent work John.