0.00
#... |
|---|
| Is there any way of globally filtering out submittals that are not acquired by the submitting entity or person? It seems that there are a lot of people processing other people's or institution's data. It seems like there is also a lot of clutter associated with old submittals that are somehow being rehashed. I am kind of more interested in viewing and commenting on data and processing results presented by amateurs that are using their own equipment and processing skills so we can compare notes on acquisition through processing. |
 #... |
|---|
|
Hi, unfortunately this is not available right now, but I plan to add it shortly. |
9.85
#... |
|---|
I am kind of more interested in viewing and commenting on data and processing results presented by amateurs that are using their own equipment and processing skills What pretentious nonsense. Harsh words to somebody who expressed his individual interests. |
7.87
#... |
|---|
What pretentious nonsense. I use from home a Rokinon 135f2 and QHY9M camera and operate it remotely from my lounge, I am also a subscriber to the Rokinon/QSI583 team at Deep Sky West, so tell me, apart from the distances involved what is the difference and how are the images I produce with DSW data less "worthy"? I've already suggested it and I'm doing it again. For each image, there should be a mandatory field, specifying whether it is self-generated data, or whether the image was made from public data. As far as I've noticed, DSW is something like public data pool for members. The same data is processed by many and uploaded here. If you are deciding what and how to capture, using your own equipment (regardless if remote-controlled or not) ist is not the same than only processing good data received from somewhere . |
|
0.00
#... |
|---|
pre·ten·tious[prəˈten(t)SHəs]ADJECTIVE
 |
0.00
#... |
|---|
|
Wow. Seems there are some raw nerves here. I'm pretty new to AstroBin but I seem to fit into at least three camps. First, I collect my own data whenever I can. I have spend hundreds of hours huddled in my sleeping bag while my rig images. I'm usually based in the Dallas area but am temporarily under wonderful dark skies in Kansas. Second, I am a member of the DSW teams. There seems to be some confusion here. One joins a team, either house sponsored using DSW supplied equipment or with a group of friends using your own equipment. In the former case there is a substantial monthly fee to support the equipment, its operation and maintenance. In the later case the team supplies all the gear, but there is substantial monthly fee for the pier and all the support that goes with it. The house teams submit target requests quarterly and a battle plan for the quarter is derived. Private teams may of course operate as they see fit. I am a member of a private team too and the target selection is done by consensus also. Team members (a varying number, call it a dozen for argument's sake) get the raw data as it is produced and process it as they see fit. Third, I, from time to time, will process a purely public data set to see what I can do with it. Although this is rare, I find it quite valuable since I can compare my results with others using the same data. This helps me identify weaknesses in my skills and helps me improve. I find all of these modalities worthwhile and have a really hard time seeing why case one and two should really be viewed separately. I have an excellent M1 data set I personally collected with a TeleVue NP127IS, QHY16200A and 10Micron GM1000HP while huddled in my car. I have a version collected by the FSQ team at DSW collected with a Tak 106FSQ, Mach1 and QSI camera. Finally I have a set collected by a private team at DSW using a TEC-160FL, SBIG STF-8300 Pro sitting on some Paramount. The equipment is all cases is clearly high quality. It was all funded by me either in cold hard cash by purchase or rental or in trade. Is the difference that I "suffered" for one data set by sitting out all night and not the others? Is the difference that maybe my polar alignment is not as good as the DSW scopes sitting on piers and that is unfair -- even though I set up and tear down every night I generally come in under 2" PAE and that is more than adequate for my system? Is the difference that not everyone can afford joining a DSW team? Well, that can't be helped but rather than spending your budget on your own equipment you could buy time at DSW or another remote imaging site. I guess I just do not get it. Isn't most of our challenge in processing and not data collection??? Let's face it, data collection is just plain mechanical with almost no creative input. It depends on the quality of your gear and your skies and to a much smaller extent your ability to operate it. Once you have decent equipment and had mastered polar alignment and learned the typical lessons of how to avoid cable snags, etc., what really do you contribute to the process?? How does that make a better result?? Now, I enjoy doing my own imaging because being under the stars is always a thrill and at the end of the day I continue to be astounded by what we amateurs can do all by ourselves. I like showing someone an image and seeing their reaction when I say I did that all by myself and you can too. Well, each to his own. I just thought I'd explain how DSW works and share my thoughts on this whole dust up. May you all have clear skies and good health Richard |
2.41
#... |
|---|
Sorry but the idea of filtering sounds a bit strange for me. Today we allow our only images (no outsourcing from distant observatories or other photographers), tomorrow - true color only (no Hubble pallet), the day after tomorrow - we would allow refractors only and NO ASTROCAMERAS AT ALL, DSLR only  Sorry again for being sarcastic ;)
|
0.00
#... |
|---|
|
Where's the popcorn? |
