 #...
·
·
3
likes
|
|---|
|
Lots of good comments here. I agree with many. I think that it is healthy to walk away from the monitor and the image for a bit of time. I have picked up many issues doing so. One simple one, is that I use yellow tinted eye-relief glasses when working at my monitor and I will sometimes forget to take them off prior to finalizing my colors. Often I have had to go back to my post to replace the image with a proper color balanced image! To add to the discussion on monitors, there is only so much we as individuals can do by ensuring that our monitors are performing consistently. Calibration was mentioned. I have seen issues with calibration, however. And you can spend lots of money and get the best monitor and calibrator, which will do you no good if nobody who actually views your image actually uses calibrated monitors! Those who have mentioned that they get different image quality on different monitors proves that point. I would have to ask then, if you get three different results on three different sources, which then do you settle on? Also, even the best calibrated monitor will perform differently under different lighting conditions. As it will for those who view your images on their monitors. I find that I have "calibrated" my monitor through use, viewing very many terrestrial photos and videos and astrophotos. Terrestrial photos are probably the best standard. And after some calibration, find that I have made some fine adjustments to that performance and it then extends very well to my best known Astro standards by reputable photographers. I never adjust my monitor now. Terrestrial photos have the advantage that they are mostly taken in a way to reproduce normal ambient lighting, such as outdoors or indoors. We know from life experience what color the sky is, many trees, grass, water, etc. Also, the standard density of terrestrial and portrait photos has been 15% gray. So we are accustom to images as such and know when they are too dark or too light. Colors, saturation, density, etc. are too freely variable in astrophotography to set standards in those areas. Maybe we can all agree that the color green is unlikely in Astrophotos. But then that is only today's standard. That leads to my last point in the paragraph below on IOTD. I should also add that there are some, maybe more than a few, who because of age or some other issues with vision, cannot really process to any standard that relates to the masses of those with good vision. And vision is a spectrum anyway. Either way, we should be gentle in any criticism of images here, be they faulty because of someone learning (who would likely benefit from criticism) and those who cannot benefit from critique at this time. @Arun H and @Bill McLaughlin I am in the camp of not using IOTD metrics for whether my images meet standard. If you look at my page, you will see I have no awards or recognitions. That is because I, like many others on AstroBin choose not to participate. So Arun, I have no metrics from that award process to use, as others may also choose not too. I find it odd that the assumption is that everyone, of course, participates. Not criticizing you, just becoming aware that many who are on AstoBin probably never considered not participating in IOTD. I hope no one joined AB just so they could get IOTD awards. However, I still do look at the number of looks and the number of likes for my images. I figure if I get better than 5O% likes, my image is probably pretty good! But mostly I appreciate the feedback in the comments on my images. To explain why I choose not to participate briefly is that when I first started astrophotography and joined AB, I did not know that I could opt-out of AB IOTD. And seeing the awards and getting some recognition, even early on in my processing career, I quickly realized that there was pressure to conform to some standard. However subtle that was, and in what direction, I cannot say, I just felt it clearly. I quickly decided that this is not how I wanted to develop my own art. It impedes complete freedom. To say that IOTD is one way to learn how to do it, is wrong in my book. Not participating in IOTD does not prevent a new astrophotographer from viewing the many images here on AB and elsewhere. And processing methods are often described. I do like looking at the IOTD images from time-to-time. But today's IOTD preferences, will be tomorrow's old hat. As a scientist, I feel that I understand what these images represent. I have tried to learn much about the nature of these objects. And in doing so, I use that information to tell my story. While I recognize that there are other wonderful famous Astrophotographers, I am confident in knowing for myself, just what I want to get out of my work. And, also that I am free to change that anytime I want and in any way I want. I also hope that not everyone does exactly the same as I do. For Astrophotograpy would be very much worse off if everyone did the same thing. And I see much too much of the very same thing in AB. Yes, much repetition here is in the task of learning, but... Astrophotography is one of the most challenging if not the most challenging of the photographic arts, in my opinion. The challenge has nothing to do with the complexity of the equipment, or how we process our images. There is far more technically challenging going on in videography than astrophotography will ever have. The technical in Astro is trivial in comparison to the difficulty of shooting the exact same subjects, under mostly the exact same lighting conditions, surroundings, etc, etc. and trying to get something different out in the end. Fact is, I've seen images of a number of objects, shot by a 60mm refractor that outclasses many done by some Planewaves on some mountaintops. (Don't get me wrong, I do like many of these big scopes work!) Though I formally opted out of IOTD, if for some reason someone messaged me and said they thought that I should submit a particular image, then that would mean a lot to me. Much more so than if everything I put out goes through some algorithm or routine and every now and then, at the whim of one or two judges, one gets picked up and advanced. |
5.21
#...
·
·
3
likes
|
|---|
Alan Brunelle: The number of looks might be somewhat representative of quality but it is extremely clear that the number of likes has almost nothing to do with quality. It is easy to find very mediocre recent images with hundreds of likes and better images of the same object that have been posted even longer ago that have maybe only a couple dozen or so. Likes clearly has lot more to to with the number of followers and such than it does with the image itself. Likes are are nice to have in that it is always nice to be appreciated but are simply not a measure of quality. |
11.91
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
Alan Brunelle: Hi Alan - I actually never made the assumption that many people participate in the IOTD competition. As I noted earlier and in a different thread, there are a lot of factors that go into whether an image is selected or not. It is very far from a level playing field. And at this point, I, like many, will very likely walk away from the IOTD competition. I in fact thought long and hard before submitting my M81 image and did not submit my most recent images (and won't). What I do find useful is comments from:
I agree with Bill that the number of likes has nothing to do with quality - more to do with maintaining a network. |
0.90
#...
·
·
3
likes
|
|---|
|
For me its all about my personal growth in the hobby and desire to learn new things. For example this is my first image of M81 and M82 here: https://www.astrobin.com/mnknm2/ and this is my recent one I finished up over the last few weeks: https://www.astrobin.com/zjy52i/B/ I do like submitting for review recently but mostly as a bench mark to see where I score. I would love to have comments back from the board but even just a score card would be fine. It would be fun to see something I did on the front page one day but its hardly a factor for me. Same with likes and comments, like Arun put it its all about networking, you get back what you put in, and im just a socially awkward individual that prefers to lurk lol. |
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
Arun H:Alan Brunelle: Hi Arun, good points. I agree mostly with what you say and what @Bill McLaughlin said, with the exception that likes do not all come from just the random clicks that come up on the images posted on the AB front page. 1. You can monitor if the likes come from your network, from random people, etc. 2. How often an image attracts more connection requests, etc. So there is a way to differentiate. A little bit. I also tend to see an increase in likes for images that I post and personally like over those of mine that I don't. So not completely useless. Even then, I really cannot disagree with Bill and you on that point. But then the 10X increase in likes, etc., that you get with an IOTD award is also as meaningless along with the sucking up that often occurs after such an award. All I am saying is that is about as far as I am willing to go in regards to my needs to learn if my images are acceptable to the public or not. I just do what I want and enjoy the relationships that I have here with those willing to interact with me. And I do learn a lot of new things. I do agree that the comments are much more valuable, even if it is the case that many are people just being polite. But I generally do not believe that is the case. Bottom line, for me (and that is a key point), is that AB is a semi-private repository for my images. It is the most convenient way for me to tell people what I do with this astrophotography "thing", and so very convenient to point people to my AB page and have them see decent renditions of my work. Friends and family, etc. I post almost all of my images that I have ever processed to completion. Some I personally think are pretty boring and when I put them up here I do not notify any of my followers that it has been posted. Its not that I want to post garbage, its just that I only process to my liking and needs. Ones I do announce, it is mostly to generate interest in the subject and discussions, etc. IOTD is out of the equation for me. And, as I said, I do like seeing the IOTD images. If I had a beef with IOTD, I think that the process should be simplified, not made more complex or "careful". The images being seen on the front of the AB front page should be the objective, not the boosting of anyones' ego, though it is understandable that an ego boost is welcome to those that get picked. I would almost rather see AB do a little jounalism and occasionally (very infrequently) pick a member astrophotographer to highlight, interview them and post a short story about who they are, how they came to the hobby, or career in AP, what they see as the future of AP and what their role might be in that future. And include a highlight of their body of work. To me, the many complaints of who got an IOTD, who didn't, who should have, seems too much like a pack of mice fighting over some crumbs. In regards to IOTD, for me, I will quote Bob Dylan: "I would never want to be a member of a club, that would have me as a member". Alan |
1.20
#...
·
·
2
likes
|
|---|
| “I would almost rather see AB do a little journalism and occasionally (very infrequently) pick a member astrophotographer to highlight, interview them and post a short story about who they are, how they came to the hobby, or career in AP, what they see as the future of AP and what their role might be in that future. And include a highlight of their body of work. “ …Now there’s a novel idea, maybe pick someone at random with a few years under their belt. Give them some hints and let them tell their story. it’s always interesting reading in the comments about a image just posted but also ups and downs of acquiring the data, and why they chose this particular DSO |
#...
·
|
|---|
Padraig Farrell: I could have added that in such an article, the image that is chosen to include would be the chosen astrophotographer's choice. That way you learn more about the person and the whys and hows of their image, as you suggest. |
 #...
·
·
3
likes
|
|---|
Arun H: You will survive  , astronomy is not about competing in IOTD
|
|
11.91
#...
·
|
|---|
AdrianC.: Oh, I know. I expect I'll be a lot happier too. |
7.67
#...
·
·
3
likes
|
|---|
Things to consider when rating your own image:
So there ya go, these are some baselines that you can use to rate your own images, or get the help of others to rate them for you. The only other suggestion I have is to never stop learning. Also if you want a critique, there is always the critique forum on this website. |
|
11.91
#...
·
·
2
likes
|
|---|
What about APOD? APOD shows you what you can do with all kinds of images, AKA have some fun with them. Some of their choices look bonkers to us, but once you step out of the IotD aesthetic mindset, you can tell it's just a few guys affiliated with NASA having a great time explaining stuff about space or science with user submitted images. I have seen APOD images that, when you look at them closely, show all kinds of issues that would tank them in the IOTD process (halos around stars, oversharpening, etc.). The purpose of APOD is different though, and it is meant to be enjoyed by the general public and educate in some fashion. So look at that in that light, rather than as a contest, or assume that somehow, only the "best" images are selected. |
11.14
#...
·
·
3
likes
|
|---|
I hate that I am saying this, but the more I do astrophotography the more I find that while I enjoy astrophotography, I hate astrophotographers. Maybe I am just not used to hobby drama but my Lord you can run into some real pieces of work in this hobby and I am not talking about the pictures! If you can relate to this, I am sorry this has been your experience as well. The bad apples in this hobby really go out of their way to try and spoil the bunch. So, like @Arun H says, it's all about finding a group of imagers you can trust for feedback. I can also relate to that (regarding some astrophotographers' attitude). I can understand why that happens as I have seen the same attitude in photography circles and particularly at middle-aged, financially accomplished individuals who decide to pursue photography studies. When it comes to finding a reliable group for constructive feedback, my suggestion is to dare to look beyond the astrophotography community. Ask for a portfolio review from a photographer/artist and be prepared for a critique that might challenge your current perceptions. |
16.18
#...
·
·
3
likes
|
|---|
|
Great question. For me, life [or at least my remaining life] is too short to agonise over images. Here is my approach. Equally driven by impecunity, infirmity and impatience. 1) I use a single display [2017 iMac 27inch - also my processor] to review all images. 2) I post as soon as I am happy with it - no waiting period. I have a rule that the post-processing/imaging timescale ratio should not exceed 1/(pi). [3.14159... not pixinsight]. 3) In effect, I rely on my emotional reaction "Hey that's rather good" or "Hmm, that's not so great". But either way I post because - for me - I am not going to change position over a few days or by more detailed post-processing. From time to time, I will review posted images in the light of new software. The RCAstro tools have, of course, been a revelation. In this case I will re-process images 1 or 2 years down the track and post revisions. 4) I post all my attempts on AB, as I hope even my failures/mistakes/sub-optimal images will be useful for my AB friends. 5) After some time, I will print up [on metal] what I consider to be my best ones and exhibit locally. Some even sell, but this is mostly about promoting the awe and wonder of the night sky here. Since I am also involved in an application for International Dark Sky status here, such images are also useful for building public support. I also use the best for my public talks. 6) In picking the best image, my own heart, feedback from AB and the public are equal guides. There is a weak correlation between what is liked here and what is impactful to the public. I think this largely because of the technical focus here [the IOTD is a perverse driver in this direction] rather than the emotional focus of the public. My "heart" rating also tends to follow the public. CS Brian |
4.67
#...
·
|
|---|
Die Launische Diva: I post my astro images on Landscape photography websites and get rave reviews and Editors picks and I am way below average. Serious Landscape photographers appreciate astrophotographers, People here should get out of the bubble. |
|
11.91
#...
·
|
|---|
Dan Kearl: Is the intent to get rave reviews? If so, I think there could be several ways to achieve this. Cultivating a following here is one. There are other social media sites where one could post and get reviews too. In the end, especially with things like narrow band imaging, there can be quite a bit of variation in what would be considered "good". It all depends on what one wants. One thing I like about this site is that you can explore different people's work and get a sense for what looks good to your eyes, and develop your own style. |
|
4.67
#...
·
|
|---|
Arun H: NOT at all. I post on Landscape sites because I am a Landscape as well as a bird and wildlife photographer. My Bird photography is currently on display at the Oregon Historical Society in Portland Oregon. I do Astro as a new a fun hobby and DON'T do it to get rave reviews. You are a serious troll. I wish you would get an IOTD so you would stop posting about why you don't get one or whatever. |
|
11.91
#...
·
·
2
likes
|
|---|
Dan Kearl: Hi Dan, I could escalate this exchange, but perhaps it is better to tone it down a bit and go back to being more constructive. First of all - if my response to yours seemed abrupt - I apologize. I should have given it a bit more thought. I brought up rave reviews because social approbation certainly is a big part of what is considered "feedback" and there was a discussion here about "likes" and such. So the intent of my post was to say there are many ways of achieving this. I should make clear that I hold no opinion one way or another of why someone is in the hobby or what motivates them. That is, IMO, up to them to decide. It is not for me to judge how people spend their time and money or what motivates them. Secondly -and I'll leave it at this - I try not to attack people personally. In a different thread, I brought up what I considered were real issues with the IOTD process. Though I was in the minority in that particular thread, several people did agree with me in the end and we got to some place constructive even if the suggestions are not followed. It is important, I think, to express opinions even when one is in the (local) minority. One shouldn't be labeled a "troll" for doing this. |
1.51
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
Ethan Pearson: A scorecard is a phenomenal idea. This way we have a rubric of sorts to guide us on how our images will be judged. But if they don't have time for two sentences (eye roll), then they certainly won't be willing to entertain the idea of a scorecard. Even if almost every judged contest in the world uses them. And again, it would add legitimacy to a contest that right now, has anything but. Thanks, Ethan, for a great suggestion. I hope someone listens to you. |
|
4.67
#...
·
|
|---|
Arun H: No need to escalate anything. You implied in your response that I seek some kind of raves or something. I have been a part of critical reviews in many photography disciplines. I know what "likes" are and what critical feedback is. I did not attack your personally but quick snarky responses like you gave I consider Troll behavior. You wanted a response and you got it. Congrats. |
|
11.91
#...
·
|
|---|
Dan Kearl: Hi Dan - I think some could consider a response implying the rest of us are living in a bubble a snarky and quick response too. So, I didn't do anything different than you did. Though, as I stated, in retrospect, I could have approached it differently. That was the intent of my previous post and this one. I'll leave it here so a productive discussion can continue to be had. |
|
4.67
#...
·
|
|---|
Arun H: I was just trying to encourage Astro people to post their work elsewhere and you turned it into a thread because you are so condescending. I won't respond again. |
2.11
#...
·
|
|---|
Tommy Mastro: I second this idea, albeit I would like to have mandatory commentary for not only the judges, but for the Top Pick regions aswell. This would help the TP/IOTD process become a powerhouse for improving intermediate astrophotographer's skill, and a way to help push the limit of what those at the highest echalons can do. I personally would like to have TP cut into experience levels. Having a Top Pick for Beginners, Intermediates, and Advanced imagers would make the entire process a lot more competitive for those that don't spend 5 people's yearly salaries on equipment. |
0.00
#...
·
|
|---|
|
I'm very new to this, and my motivation is to see if I can create acceptable images with 'budget' gear that I think are good. I'm making images public on here in the hopes of getting feedback on obvious (to non noobs) problems I might have in my images. Back focus, tilt, noise are some of the issues I'm now at least aware of and can at least Google/YouTube solutions for. It'd be great if people like my images as much as I like some (most, lol?) I see on here but I won't be entering, or winning, any prizes  |
