# 07 Mar, 2018 18:19
Steve MilneThere are not many people agitating against change here either.
Roberto ColombariHmm … I can only speak for myself, but I contributed to the discussion (once) in the "manifesto" thread and I filled Salvas survey. I feel like this is enough. Some other folks have made numerous and eloquent statements, but this is mostly repeating the same or similar arguments. So for me there is no need to fuel that fire and Robertos statement is true - as far as I am concerned.
# 07 Mar, 2018 19:34
I don't understand everything in details, but I think I have caught the main ideas.
I am thinking about a good way to get retired earlier than I am supposed to.
Some of you could buy a kind of UBER astronomy. I can do something like this to help, so I can get money to share with the sky at home. Home and sky, this is my very personnal dream, and nobody is called to share this idea.
Is there a chance for this buisness ?
Clear skies (at home)
# 07 Mar, 2018 19:46
Jeffbax Home telescopeWhy not? I'm all for free enterprise.
# 07 Mar, 2018 20:25
OK steve, you are right. I will think about this as I should retire in a few years under a dark sky |
This topic is very complicated. Do you like cars or do you like driving a car ? Very existential question No one has the answer, but everyone is free to feel something personal about it. I don't think this discusion can end on astrobin. So keep on sharing all the pictures without categories.
# 07 Mar, 2018 21:32
Jeffbax Home telescopeNot a big fan of cars Jeff, but I know that some folks have a fetishistic attraction to certain makes and models.
# 08 Mar, 2018 05:36
I like your plan and hope you can pull off Astrobin as your full time gig. Better for you and better for us. We spend a ton of money on hardware and software so I don’t see and issue with a small amount of money to be spent on a place to host images, get ideas, and learn from others.
Maybe you could consider running a live conference as a part of an expanded Astrobin. You’ve a got nice tight community here as a base and I believe interest in AP is growing. Just an out there thought…
# 08 Mar, 2018 08:19
Thanks for the survey. Let's see what this changes will bring.
I have great doubts what the submitting stage will bring. I have the impression that it was hard to get all 15 submitters. Only a small number of astrobinners wanted to deal in depth with the images. This might result in the same situation that brought you to switch to the current 3 stages model.
# 08 Mar, 2018 15:19
Salvatore IoveneThis is a great start! But not clear where people like John Hayes fit in? We have remote people who pay someone to do something for them. Then we have remote people who do it all without help from anyone (that will be me soon). Would I be Backyard when I'm visiting my remote site (with a home) and Remote when I'm controlling my remote site from my other home? Am I Remote when I control my backyard equipment that's 100' away from my home?
I believe the categories I suggested are more distinct as they clearly separate when you had help (how much help TBD) and when you did it all yourself. Just a thought.
# 08 Mar, 2018 15:23
The categories are for images, not for people.|
If an image was done remotely, with help from other people to make maintenance of the system, but without assistance to expose and download the images, then it is REMOTE.
If you travel to your site, which is usually employed to make remote images, and make images during the visit, then it is TRAVELLING.
If you make images at home remotely from your backyard setup 100' away, it is BACKYARD. We always consider the capacity of prompt access to the setup. (Unless, of course, you want to impress your friends with your high end technology prowess )
# 09 Mar, 2018 00:01
I am currently working on a 4 panel mosaic of the Running Chicken Nebula. The Ha I am taking from my HEAVILY light polluted suburban backyard. The RGB I’ll either be taking from my darksite 1.5 hours away or at a star party in 8 days.|
When using both, what category does that come under?
# 09 Mar, 2018 05:59
|This is a hobby that I truly enjoy. I can only hope that Astrobin remains fresh, and does not follow the politics an general immaturely on other forums. That really takes the fun out of such an interesting and challenging hobby.|
# 09 Mar, 2018 11:16
ColinThe system should allow the entry of mixed categories for the same image, when needed, for the purpose of classification and search. For the aim of competition, the highest rank (Backyard < Traveling < Remote < Downloaded < Professional) should be employed.
# 09 Mar, 2018 11:26
|I was writing the same suggestion as Luiz's|
# 09 Mar, 2018 16:07
|I love this debate and will see where this all goes. I have been doing this for a year, I don't have my own gear yet less my wide angle lens. That's down the road. But here is a thought. What about a contest where those who want to try gets the same RAW data. The end point.. who gets the IOTD from the same data. That's a contest on processing. Just a thought. Clear Skies to all of us.|
# 09 Mar, 2018 18:10
Van H. McComasThat would indeed be part of the planned custom contests module.
# 09 Mar, 2018 19:33
Wow, sorry I missed the survey - I wasn't even aware of it. Where the heck was I? lol. But thank you for a very interesting and informative message. |
# 12 Mar, 2018 00:08
Thanks for sharing the results of a well conceived survey Salvatore.|
AstroBin is very well calibrated to AP needs, and has a fantastic community … as reflected by the comments above.
# 12 Mar, 2018 16:16
Salvatore, thank you for the hard work and all your efforts!
As to the fairness debate; if I get this correctly, the core problem is that we have different economic conditions to start with that put limits to our possibilities. This is omnipresent in market-economic systems. Freedom of an individual in a community and community-wide equality are conflictive values. In a completely fair scenario, it would be necessary to only compare images taken with hardware of the same specifications and quality under the same conditions…imagine this, not only would 50% of the images that are posted here be M42 and M31 (and I don't exclude mine) but also all taken with an 8" newtonian and a KAF8300 or EOS1000 under a bortle scale 4 sky… I think to some extent unfairness is the price that we have to pay for diversity and (in contrast to some real-life inequalities) I'm happy about the diversity here even if I may never get an IOTD.
# 12 Mar, 2018 16:32
the concept, at least for me, is slightly different.
It's not purely a matter of "money", while more a matter of typology.
If you use purchase data, for instance, you are doing quite a different thing than those who collect the data with an end-to-end process (from setting up your equipment, to collect photons and processing the data).
It doesn't mean that the firsts are better than these latters of viceversa, simply they are two branches of the same hobby.
# 12 Mar, 2018 16:36
I think this is a good example how to drive a working system into big confusion.
Maybe not filling in all basic information, like the number of frames and subframes, exposure time, etc. and location, might exclude an image from the pick list for submitting.
# 12 Mar, 2018 16:39
Gernot SemmerWhich is correct, IMHO. If you don't fill the required basic data the image shouldn't go on in the process.
Consider, anyway, that it can be simply implemented a multiple choice combobox where users choose their image typology (backyard, remote, purchase, pro, etc….
# 12 Mar, 2018 16:48
|And what do you do if you mix data from different sources?|
# 12 Mar, 2018 16:50
Luiz made the following suggestion few days ago, not so bad IMO.|
# 12 Mar, 2018 17:00
Roberto ColombariHi Roberto,
I absolutely agree with you if we are talking of typology which can be developed using objective criteria. I just got the impression that part of the debate was rather dealing with fairness and therefore a moral claim that is pretty hard if not impossible to develop distinct criteria for under the given circumstances.
# 12 Mar, 2018 23:23
Roberto ColombariThe simplest explanation of things getting over complicated
1. It is useful to see if you want to understand the data collection source.
1. It in effect penalises remote users for spending their hard earned money on more regular data.
2. It promotes division.
3. It promotes any 'existing' bias.
4. To some degree, it seems to me anyway to say collecting the data yourself merits extra reward. From my perspective data is just pots of paint, you still have to make the image. Whether I bought the paint or sent someone else to the hardware shop really does not matter to me. 99% of the skill is the processing of the data not the collection (note I say this as someone with 3, soon to be 5 remote setups, fully automated and with more devices and processes to consider than a majority of people have, so I would be right up there if this was a genuine category!)
The point: If you say X you more often then not imply there is a Y! In this scenario, you risk one being viewed more highly than the other, or worse still two camps each with opposing views. Hopefully, this won't happen but if you create the 'risk' often it will be realised.
Before it is introduced I would like to see an unequivocal definition of the purpose and real value. The risks are division, not a good thing for any community.
BastiHWhat is fair? In your eyes x in mine y. I have empathy and respect for all those hampered by budget, location and other hindrances even skill levels. I don't want to segregate those with low budgets, light polluted skies and less experience of into some dark corner of AB. I want them out here with everyone else being part of the community. The same as I don't want to the top imagers forming their own little elite corner.
Finally, introducing categories I.E. Moving from the current no categories with its volume of complaints, to many categories or combinations of categories. I wonder if adding will just create more entities to complain about in many more unique and niche ways.
Ultimately, these are just pondering and I have no say, I see Salva seems to have already agreed with the idea. Maybe I missed it but without a defined purpose I can't help but feel it turns 'the same hobby' into 'many hobbies' those with a strong bias will now have the tools to further amplify there bias. Those without this biaswill probably rarely register the new criteria.
To drive that last point home, maybe not intentional but the statements like "the highest rank (Backyard < Traveling < Remote < Downloaded < Professional)" are already showing the bias by ordering what data ranks highest. A slippery slope!
|You have no new notifications.|