# 13 Mar, 2018 08:10
Roberto Colombari+ 1000
# 13 Mar, 2018 11:49
Let's reason the other way round.
Why the following images aren't even in TPs:
You invested money. I invested time. Has investing time less value than investing money?
Each of these images required weeks to be created.
But I tell you the answer why they haven't been promoted: judges are doing implicitly categorizations in their minds and are excluding a priori pro data (even if I'm pretty sure they don't actually know that they aren't "plug-and-play" HST images). So why not playing openly and create categories?
Paddy GillilandOut there, in mostly every hobby/sports categories are implemented.
Soccer: you can play regular 11 vs. 11 soccer or play in the small ground 7 vs 7 or you can even play beach soccer and so on… Don't they seem the same stuff? At the end of the story you to have to score goals! Yeah, but they don't mix up.
Why should categories divide the community? I think exactly the contrary, they can give visibility to those who deserve and that don't have, making "more people happier" than it is now. Don't forget that approx. 66% of the community stated that the game, as it is now, is not fair!
# 13 Mar, 2018 12:03
I beg to differ. For a lot of people, who like myself don't even have a backyard (I live in an apartment in a heavy light polluted 5M people urban area) it is extremely difficult to arrange for a short duration trip, leaving wife and kid alone, travelling 160 km to reach dark skies to obtain a few hours exposure. Here in Brazil you must pay 100% of import taxes, and acquiring a Mach1 is as difficult as buying an AP 1600 in the US. It is easy to say that "data is just pots of paint" when you have a streamlined facility to generate terabytes of monthly data. I'm working hard to assemble my remote observatory, and when it is ready I would happily categorize it as REMOTE, because I know perfectly well that it should be unfair to compete with people who don't have access to the same data.
Paddy GillilandNot a slippery slope. The rank indicates the average limitation for acquiring high quality data. ESO data should not compete with Samyang 135mm f/2.0 data (I have one of these, and I love it!).
# 13 Mar, 2018 12:30
Luiz DuczmalSo in this example …
Steve Milne… I would be 'Remote' whilst not in Spain, 'Travelling' whilst in Spain. And, since it usually takes a number of weeks to finish data collection of an image, I will need to keep a record of what data is captured whilst 'Travelling', so that I do not fall foul of the system, and I submit the final image properly as 'Mixed-category'. My imaging partner (who may not have made the maintenance trip to Spain) would, of course, have to submit the data as 100% 'Remote'. Correct? I'm still not sure if the data I gather remotely from my home observatory when I go on holiday is 'Remote' or 'Backyard'. I intend to set the 'Home' imaging run off, then the Spanish rig (they run identically), and then head out to dinner, a show, and who knows what else.
It does seem to me that we are making a lot of 'demands' on hobbyists. I got enough opportunitites for 'form-filling' when I was working, and it is not a part of my job that I miss. This system is getting increasingly complicated, and I do worry if a lot of the fun is not being sucked out of the hobby by this approach. I do fill in the data, but I understand that some might not want to (or cannot be bothered). But that is another topic that we have done to death elsewhere.
There is an aspect of the 'unfairness' and resources question that has not been considered. It is perfectly possible that there is not a simple relationship between the resources an individual may have, and the amount they choose to spend on their hobby. That is to say, some well-off individuals might choose to operate modest equipment whilst other folks with less means might choose to have relatively expensive equipment, including 'stretching' their budget to include 'remote imaging'. It would be an error to assume that only 'toffs' have high-end equipment or image remotely. Some folks are making more of a commitment (perhaps even 'sacrifice' for their hobby than others, and I wonder why they should be condemned for doing so.
Paddy also makes a good general point about segregation. It is perfectly clear from what they write that some folks do have a sense that some methods are superior to others. I do have my concerns that this obligation to provide information will be used to divide imagers into different groups, some of whom are considered more worthy than others.
# 13 Mar, 2018 12:30
I agree that is a waste of time sitting at -20C and seeing your camera collecting photons ( ) but I completely disagree that the skill is just processing.
For instance setting up a 180ED F2.8 is an absolute nightmare (never done it, just heard about it).
# 13 Mar, 2018 12:31
Roberto ColombariAgreed (although it amounts to same point, bias is being shown be that implicit or explicit!) - you can be open and promote the bias or you can provide guidelines that state all data including that from pro-data should be considered. As i said I don't mind categories if their purpose is explicitly defined. You used the word 'ranking'. This is the risk it creates, people will 'score' the image more or less subject to the source. You are now referencing TP so based on ranking and the source, the examples have a lower chance of TP if ranked as suggested? I think it is a shame good images get overlooked for any reason. Adding a ranking system to enhance bias does not seem ideal to me? Maybe I have missed the point.
Roberto ColombariBut there is only one FA Cup or Coppa Italia winner. The best team/image wins. We need to make sure the best teams/images are in the draw though! Not find a way to make excluding them easier.
I agree other 'feeder' sub-competitions are a good idea. The groups are the foundation for this, E.G. set one up called backyard <£3000 set up and let it run a comp.
If it has a minimum number of entries the winner can get an auto TP for example. Exposure for each of those groups and areas is thus provided. From TP the IoTD is then awarded based on the judge's view. Using the football analogy a small upcoming team gets exposure, support and is noticed, but they are not yet ready to win the cup. Keep progressing though, and one day they could…..
What is the point? Not said in a negative way, but rather a very serious way - if they are to be used they should promote areas not segment them. I see your points and was not, as I am not now, against them. I am mindful only they are implemented with defined reason and purpose and if possible these should be as close to unequivocal as possible. This requires others topics and areas to also support (TP/IoTD guidelines) groups running sub-comps, auto feed-ins etc.
If a staff member never picks pro-data for promotion they are failing to represent the community they represent. Guidelines on what IoTD is (FA Cup) should be provided. Other sub-comps can greatly enhance the diversity of images afforded exposure via TP. Categories should be considered in sub-comp criteria but not relevant to final IoTD which should be the best image (though guidelines here and some supporting tools could ensure more diversity without reducing the quality).
# 13 Mar, 2018 12:34
An astroimager spends more or less tons of hours for collecting photons, weeks to process the data and hasn't the time to spend 5 minutes filling the basic info form? LoL
# 13 Mar, 2018 12:36
This is the point: you are assuming that who downloads and process data is doing the same sport as who goes out and collects photons and process them!
For me it's not the same! It's something different!
# 13 Mar, 2018 12:39
But surely any 'unfairness' here comes from the fact that you have urban skies and light pollution, and you may be 'competing' against a 'Backyard' astro-imager who happens to live next door to DSW.
# 13 Mar, 2018 12:43
No need to laugh at me Roberto. When I used to complain about the amount of bureaucracy I had to put up with in my job, the standard response was 'well it will only take a few minutes'. Firstly, all these 'few minutes' add up, and secondly, I might like the time spent 'collecting photons' and processing them, whilst I might dislike the form-filling.
# 13 Mar, 2018 12:49
Me too. This is why I never fill it, accepting at the same time that my images could not be promoted to the next tiers…
# 13 Mar, 2018 13:09
May be! And if someone lives in a remote place far from civilization, and enduring a lot of discomfort just to live under the stars, kudos to her! I think she deserves it!
# 13 Mar, 2018 13:18
Luiz DuczmalOn the contrary: many of us rural folks don't understand the attraction of city-living. As for 'discomforts' some of us have electricity and even the Internet…. Are you suggesting we are uncivilized?Steve MilneMay be! And if someone lives in a remote place far from civilization, and enduring a lot of discomfort just to live under the stars, kudos to her! I think she deserves it!
# 13 Mar, 2018 13:21
Roberto ColombariI have set ups running from a 135 lens to a 14" f/2.8 each have their challenges but they are pre-requisites in my mind. I do not expect any prizes or extra recognition or acknowledgement for it.
You don't enter an F1 race if you can't drive sort of thing
If you chose to purchase a scope that is more difficult you and you have a nightmare setting up then maybe you bought the wrong scope - is that a negative or a positive? If you buy an F1 car and have not passed your test that is just the kind of stupid that results in death. Not something to be given credit for. Or you wait, you learn, you get it right, you publish the picture and, in theory with the pre-requisites complete you get a better result. It is just part of the hobby that has to be done if you chose to go down that path.
Roberto ColombariNot assuming anything - I have been quite explicit in all comments that the definition of the site drives its purpose. Open the home page "Home of Astrophotography" is the banner, summarising this = pictures. If the site has a different agenda E.G. Who is the best at sitting up in the cold setting a complex scope that might be too much for them then the site requires redefinition?! I don't mind on that basis I will still be in the running
However, I agree that representation of different views and approaches is important and the groups with feeder type sub-comps can
1. Allow for that 'group' to converse on pressing and topical points.
2. Allow for their images to be represented in TP - which i thought was the point (exposure and diversity)?
I think you are translating my comments as disagreement, this is not the case. I agree, I just agree differently!
Also feel someone has to ask the obvious question - Why are you so keen to see Pro-data as the lowest ranked? As you're one of the masters in this area it is an interesting position to rank it at the bottom of the pile. For me, it should be represented with the correct weighting as should each area of this diverse hobby. If the weighting is right, which your stats indicated it was, I am not sure why changes to something that is already 'fixed' are required at the one end (TP/IoTD) of the scale. But I see the exposure and diversity benefit at the sub-comps end of the scale.
It goes back to purpose and definitions. It's all very well having categories, groups etc and even a site. As per earlier comment is this an 'image' site or a 'complete astronomer site' - the banner suggests the former but we don't have a definition on that. Likewise the same is true of TP/IoTD. If these are clear a lot of these conversations are by default resolved.
Another point of view ~17 AB indexed top 50 (~a third) have used or are currently using remote or pro-data. Change the status quo so they are less 'valued' than the point of being on the site is likewise devalued for them. Granted those here would likely stay, but the new joiners (let's remember we pay for the privilege of being here) who do some remote or pro would most not join. It would not be the right site for them if they join in a perceived disadvantaged position. Normalisation has been proven as achieved, now we are pressing for more than this?
# 13 Mar, 2018 13:22
Hahaha I would love to live in an "uncivilized" place like that! :-)
# 13 Mar, 2018 13:24
Paddy GillilandPS: Not saying this is the solution, just using to make the points
# 13 Mar, 2018 13:29
Luiz DuczmalWhat's with all this talk of suffering? Must one suffer to be "playing fairly"? Steve nailed the point: some skies suck and some don't. Do your best to get under the good ones. If it's hard to get under good skies, then it's hard.Steve MilneMay be! And if someone lives in a remote place far from civilization, and enduring a lot of discomfort just to live under the stars, kudos to her! I think she deserves it!
A couple of other connected points even though I'm trying not to get sucked back into this black hole…
Roberto ColombariI agree with Paddy on this. I believe there is massive skill required to get a system working reliably every night and especially one that you cannot touch. However, data acquisition, once mastered is not a differentiating factor in the final image. You cannot tell one image from another due to the method of acquisition. Note I said "once mastered" meaning one has handled focus, tracking, pointing and guiding issues, etc…
Does anyone remember reading Gendler and seeing pictures of him in his driveway in Hartford? Did we not marvel at this work? Was he suffering enough? He said back in the day (paraphrasing) that amateurs can do better today with modest equipment than they can do at Palomar. For what we do this is very true…even in LP areas (almost).
I found this to be inspirational. Gendler and others moved me to try for the 1,000th time until I got it figured out. It takes money, equipment and skies to get anything close to the images I desire to make. If someone out "here" wants to judge it in ways that I think are fair or unfair, then have at it. I've seen the unfair side of such things before in other walks of life. And you know what? That inspired me too. We are going to advance the hobby in the best way we know how.
I love AB and what happens here (except for this part). I'm not going to let any wayward attitudes or unresolvable debates mess that up.
# 13 Mar, 2018 13:47
In F1 a pilot both drives and sets the car up with the engineers (test phases).
Who purchases or downloads pro data isn't setting up anything, differently from who goes out and shoot.
Besides the final product is the image, the way both arrive to it is completely different. Why don't taking it into account? Where does this poison fear come from?
I honestly think, Paddy, that you haven't completely understood the purpose of categories. Is not to point the finger to or put into a corner those who do it (I am one of them!!), but rather try to make the games a little be interesting for everyone.
Every time I access the TPs area for promoting images, I always see the same bunch of authors!
Following your logic that IOTD/TPs should just represent the best astroimage of the day - in absolute terms - , my pro images should be IOTD/TPs one day yes, and the other as well. Lloyd's images, the same. Coles's image, the same. Your images, the same. Boring, isn't it?
# 13 Mar, 2018 14:19
Deep Sky West (Ll...
Well, we can or can't agree with this statement (I personally don't agree that suffering must be rewarded) but the community showed an intention to change concerning the "fairness" and we should take it into account.
Anyway, it's not a question of suffering rather more simply differentiate things that have the same final product but quite different ways to achieve it.
Deep Sky West (Ll...
This is exactly the point. IMHO, Gendler is recognized as one of the masters more for what he did from his driveway than for the other images that he did when he decided to go remotely.
This means that backyard imaging is still something that fascinates the astrocommunity rather than remote. In the current AB system, maybe it's just my wrong opinion, I don't see it fairly rewarded.
This is probably why you have practically all your last 25 images as TPs, while this guy (just for instance) not –> https://www.astrobin.com/users/mesone/
# 13 Mar, 2018 14:44
Paddy GillilandBecause suffering must not be awarded (cit. Lloyd)
I suffer a lot to put them together but once the trick's done, pro data can't compete with any others.
# 13 Mar, 2018 14:54
Roberto ColombariI don't know that imager nor his situation. Can't comment on that.
"WHAT" is probably why my images are TP? I didn't understand what you're giving as the reasons and don't want to assume. I would say, if asked, the reasons are many including but not limited to maniacal dedication, obsession, practice, help, support, feedback, resources, time, temperament, terrestrial experience, artistic flair, mimicry, skies, skills, reputation, expectation, etc… I'm almost halfway to 10,000 hours in imaging time which is my Malcolm Gladwell inspired goal. None of this has anything to to with AB.
You miss my larger point. Backyarding can be fun. But at some point enough is enough. Gendler moved from his backyard to New Mexico and then to space. I believe it was a couple of years before he actually saw his own remote telescope. In the minds of some maybe he took an evolutionary step backwards? ;-) I appreciate every step of that journey. I'm jumping off at New Mexico.
I'm staying away from what's fair and unfair…it's an intractable debate. But, if anyone believes that we are all only as good as our location, they are really and sorrowfully off the mark. Gendler was better than his driveway. Others are better than their light-polluted east-only balconys, and so on.
# 13 Mar, 2018 15:16
Deep Sky West (Ll...
Sorry Lloyd but I think you missed my point since the beginning. I am not saying to JUST award backyard imagers and kick you out from AB.
I (we) am just proposing to give them the chance to run for a "parallel" IOTDs (maybe not everyday, dunno. Let's think about it).
Why do you think this is putting the other group in a disadvantaged position? For what concerns to me, giving some more visibility to backyarders doesn't take any visibility to the others.
Deep Sky West (Ll...Besides the fact that you are an exceptional processor, your images are outstanding because you have outstanding data (sky, integration hours, best-of-breed equipments, etc…. Stating that no one here is the King Midas of the astrophotography, with manure is quite hard to come out with a mushroom risotto!
Should you be penalised? Of course not!
Should we have a parallel categories for those who record the data from their own (i.e. -> are doing astrophotography in a completely different way from those who purchase the data) ? I think it could be a nice idea.
# 13 Mar, 2018 15:34
Guys, I love threads like this but you're now rowing in circles, aren't you?|
Wouldn't the custom contests module solve all this? With that, you can have as many contests as you want, as specific as you want, recurring, open-ended or single-run, for any topic you want. All community managed. I will make a proposal later in the year (first I need to overhaul the Equipment and Search modules)
# 13 Mar, 2018 16:24
Salvatore IoveneAgreed - It appears even when I largely agree with the point I still need to be argued around
I am not opposed to new features so long as they do not detract from the wider community already established and working. I.E. They improve without breaking.
Salvatore IoveneIn my opinion I have been agreeing with this with the caveat they can also be a feeder system into the queue maybe at TP level. This ensures the diversity sought by those who want categories. This could be linked to groups and promote sub-communities and interests while maintaining the general overall IoTD award.
Roberto ColombariJust to qualify this. Seeing the best image in TP or IoTD is not boring at all for me, ensuring the best images, including those that may not be getting there under the current system, is of more importance.
If a feature is added explain it purpose (comp module is largely self-explanatory but some high-level notes will be good) - If, on the other hand, you change something, as in my line of work ensure you have qualified purpose any benefit. That's all I have really been saying…..
Over to you the Salva
# 13 Mar, 2018 17:30
I fully agree wih that.
I honestly don't see IOTD as a contest. It is an interesting image selected by community from recent uploads. I like to see it diverse and independent of any categories, etc. For IOTD I like to see interesting, sometimes unexpected selections maybe. If I want to see nice images from backyard imagers, I know where to look, if I want to see nice planetary images, I know where to find them, etc. Categories will kill diversity. Image of the Day is NOT Astrophotographer of the Year. And hence it is at least questionable to apply rules from the second to the first. IOTD is just a brief showcase of an image from recent uploads. IOTD is not the best image from recently uploaded nor it is the best image ever of some particular target. It does not put astrophotographer in an eternal hall of fame or something, it does not mean that the author is the best astrophotographer ever, it does not come with money. It does not tell that the author is better than the others. That is why it is beyond fairness or unfairness to me.
Salvatore's desicion is excellent. Let's just create competiitons for people who want them. Let people who want to compete so badly create competitions with countless categories and increasingly complex rules. I want IOTD interesting and simple.
We already made selection procedure more complicated and all we get are demands to get it even more complicated. This will be an endless growing snowball. That "fairness" people talk here is simply absolutely impossible to achieve.
I mean, take a look at APOD. You submit and image and it is either selected or not. That's it. No categories, no countless input forms to fill, nothing. No questions asked. A black box, you input image and it is either AOPD or not. And each day we get interesting image.
PS. Take as an example today's IOTD. Two people collected the data, while one did processing. Equipment does not belong to the author of IOTD. How do we categorize that? Does not matter to me. It is a very nice animation, loved to see it and want to see selections like this in the future.
|You have no new notifications.|