Cookie consent

AstroBin saves small pieces of text information (cookies) on your device in order to deliver better content and for statistical purposes. You can disable the usage of cookies by changing the settings of your browser. By browsing AstroBin without changing the browser settings, you grant us permission to store that information on your device.

I agree

IOTD 2.0

RAD
23 May, 2020 05:36
Professional data not often given the IOTD?   Two in one week sounds often enough to me.

This is not personal, has nothing to do with image quality, and i will not be partaking in the discussion further.  i just wanted to refute  the contention that professional data  does not often get the IOTD.  It obviously does.
olaskarpen
23 May, 2020 11:35
I love to see amateur pictures that in my eyes deserve IOTD and TP much more than professional data. Amateur photographers spend maybe 10 to 70 hours + editing and planning objects.
But I also think there should be room for all of us here at Astrobin😀
Edited 23 May, 2020 19:41
schmeah
23 May, 2020 11:42
I was following your previous thread, and see both sides of the coin. What I found interesting in the latest professional scope IOTD however is the comment by the imager describing how he came to eventually process this data (0.1 hour from the Discovery Scope) … “ I am bored though, and felt like a challenge for processing. Was mainly an exercise in clone stamping, mask creation, and pattern removal.”
Don’t get me wrong, it’s an absolutely beautiful, well deserving image. But I recall spending many, many  hours struggling with the capture of this same target under the poorest of conditions, not posting it because the processing was nearly impossible, ultimately completing it the following year as one of the most difficult images I recall ever having done. So when I see a -yawn, I’m bored what should I do. Time for another IOTD- entry, I can understand how threads like your initial one can engender such strong opinion. That said, I am relatively new to Astrobin and find it to be absolutely to be the most helpful Astro resource on the internet. So just like APOD, they can use whatever criteria they like to pick their winners with and I’ll continue to enjoy looking at these beautiful images, if not slightly envious, from my Bortle white skies.
benny_csizi
23 May, 2020 13:18
I think one of the main outcomes of the last thread was that professional data only gets IOTD when it is exceptionally processed (and only 0.3% of all IOTDs ever were from professional data). Please look at the raw image in the comments of today's IOTD (or in the last thread). Astrophotography is more that just acquisition, in my opinion processing is just as important, or in some cases even more crucial to get a nice image.
While I agree that different rules should apply for backyard vs professional data and the majority of IOTDs should be amateur work (which is already the case), exceptional processing like todays IOTD is very deserving of this award. Maybe this means that there are two professional data IOTDs in one week, but so what. IOTD isn't some highly paid prize that one mentions in their resumé, it is just a nice award that exhibits a beautiful picture of our night sky. I am just happy to see a nice picture every time I open this website. Of course I hope to get better in AP to get one of my images posted there too, but until that happens I won't be angry just because someone won this award by using professional data…
matherneconnor
23 May, 2020 16:44
The second I saw the IOTD, I knew this thread would be reincarnated.

Benjamin Csizi
I think one of the main outcomes of the last thread was that professional data only gets IOTD when it is exceptionally processed (and only 0.3% of all IOTDs ever were from professional data). Please look at the raw image in the comments of today's IOTD (or in the last thread). Astrophotography is more that just acquisition, in my opinion processing is just as important, or in some cases even more crucial to get a nice image.

Thanks Benjamin, I appreciate it! I think we need to update the count from 7 IOTDs for professional data to 8 now smile

Jokes aside, I feel like I should clarify that I do help the telescope operator when it comes to acquiring the images. This ranges from what targets to shoot for, what settings to use for the sensor, along with what integration to go with. The operator is interested in astrophotography, but does not have a lot of background in terms of targets or settings. I also don't want to minimize their work though, they are amazing at their job and none of these images would be possible without their know how.

Derek Santiago
not posting it because the processing was nearly impossible, ultimately completing it the following year as one of the most difficult images I recall ever having done. So when I see a -yawn, I’m bored what should I do. Time for another IOTD- entry, I can understand how threads like your initial one can engender such strong opinion.

Sorry for this comment, I never meant for my caption to be interpreted that way. I was just wanting to challenge myself with a processing, kind of like someone who might regularly run 5ks deciding to run a half marathon to challenge themselves.

Regardless, I just figured I would take the time to thank the judges. I can't think of any volunteers that get yelled at as much they do. They consistently do their best to judge all the images and decide on an IOTD. But no matter what, it is either "this image isn't good enough", "there needs to be more solar images", or "this isn't amateur". It seems like no matter what they do, people are always upset. So I will do like I always do, and suggest people volunteer to be in their shoes and be the change they want to see. Not surprisingly, it seems no one actually wants to step in their shoes, I wonder why?

Connor
adamland
23 May, 2020 16:52
With today's IOTD we have gone from 0.38% to 0.43% of IOTD awarded to professional data in the last 5 years. This truly shines a light on this injustice! Sorry, this feels like recency bias to me.
Snjór
23 May, 2020 18:42
Adam Landefeld
With today's IOTD we have gone from 0.38% to 0.43% of IOTD awarded to professional data in the last 5 years. This truly shines a light on this injustice! Sorry, this feels like recency bias to me.
Scandalous!
carastro
23 May, 2020 21:58
If we had one day per week (for example) for best professional data in the last week (including processing of data you have bought but did not capture yourself), and the rest of the week non professional data, this would save all these arguments.

I know I am wasting my time saying this though as it's never going to change and more arguments will crop up every now and then.

Carole
Edited 23 May, 2020 21:58
Andys_Astropix
24 May, 2020 00:05
…and the Trolling begins again! Boring (sigh) ……

BTW - I didn't pick this one, I was tempted but another of my colleagues got in first!  smile

IMO it's a fabulous close up image of a very popular target for amateurs - something we will never otherwise see.
Congratulations to Connor for bringing this rare jewel to our attention!  smile
GWLopez
24 May, 2020 00:21
I am a big fan of Astrobin. Since joining 2 ½ years ago I have visited the website nearly everyday, often more than once. I have enjoyed wonderful astrophotographs, learned a lot, and made many friends. Despite all of the many positives of my Astrobin experience, however, the loud and contentious public arguments about the IOTD have made Astrobin much less enjoyable. As you all know, this vitriolic debate has reappeared again and again. Last February one of my images was honored at IOTD and became the focus of outrage that argued that it was unworthy of recognition. The argument grew louder and louder, with attacks spreading from Astrobin to my personal photography website used by me and my family.

In my judgment, at the heart of the controversy is the notion that IOTD is a competition to recognize “the best” image. As we all know, “best” is a wholly subjective term, not easily defined by quantitatively exact criteria. As a result, the IOTD argument is regularly resurfaced, often by those who feel that their images were unjustly overlooked for recognition. I propose that we think about the IOTD differently. Rather than recognition of “the best image,” let’s make it a recognition of “notable images” that we would like to bring to the attention of the whole AB community. There are many types of images that would be ‘notable.’ Here is a partial list of images that could be considered ‘notable.’

·      An exceptional demonstration of processing skill, which is what we see in the 05-23-20 IOTD by Connor Matherne and the IOTD on 05-16-20 by Alberto Pisabarro. There is a saying in golf, “It is the indian, not the arrow,” which means that no matter how high quality the equipment, the operator is still the most important contributor to success (or failure). We have all seen less-than-distinguished imagery created from professional data. Connor and Alberto are highly skilled astrophotographers that create exceptional imagery no matter what data they have (just look at their galleries).

 ·      A strong RGB DSO image created on the balcony of an apartment in a urban white zone, where the photographer spent months gathering 50 or 60 hours of data to overcome the light pollution. There are many AB contributors who face these challenges and would like to see what dedication and skill can produce.

 ·      A remarkable deep, detailed image created with the state-of-the-art amateur technology (e.g., images created with data from Chilescope, Deep Sky West, etc.). Many of us would enjoy seeing what the best gear and conditions can produce.

·      A planetary, solar, lunar, or other solar system event that is important, unusual, or periodic. We have exceptionally talented planetary, lunar, and solar amateur astrophotographers contributing to AB who are always documenting such events.

·      A strong image from someone who has a large body of work. This would be a way to introduce everyone to members who have been longtime contributors to amateur astronomy.

·      An image of a new discovery made by an AB amateur. A few AB contributors are making significant contribution to science.

·      Images that are “first time displayed on AB.” There are countless exotic objects and phenomena.

 ·      Images from one of the early AB pioneers, such as J-P Matsavainos and Sara Wager, to introduce new member to those who help established AB and helped set the standards for amateur astrophotography.

 ·      and many other types of “notable” images.

I believe that the purpose of the IOTD should be to bring to the attention of the AB audience things that are worth knowing and recognizing. AB is very rich and fast moving. It is easy to miss many wonderful images, collections, events, and people. With this approach, the role of the selection committee could be both editorial and a judgment of quality. The take away of my note is that our community is rich with talented, passionate people. Let’s celebrate them and their work. Let’s remember the reason we came to Astrobin in the first place . . . to share our view of the Universe.
Edited 24 May, 2020 00:26
Andys_Astropix
24 May, 2020 00:44
^^^ +1 What Gary said! ^^^  smilesmilesmile
rob77
24 May, 2020 00:52
There's another Pro running TP…Never two without three…
rob77
24 May, 2020 00:58
Well, actually there was…I can't find it anymore…it must have left the queue
matherneconnor
24 May, 2020 01:51
Andy 01
TW - I didn't pick this one, I was tempted but another of my colleagues got in first!  IMO it's a fabulous close up image of a very popular target for amateurs - something we will never otherwise see.
Congratulations to Connor for bringing this rare jewel to our attention!
Hahaha, I will take even tempting you into picking it as high praise. Thanks for the kind words Andy smile

Also Gary, as always, coming in with the words of wisdom
tolgagumus
24 May, 2020 04:03
Adam Landefeld
With today's IOTD we have gone from 0.38% to 0.43% of IOTD

Definition of confirmation bias.
siovene
24 May, 2020 07:15
What Gary said is the embodiment of the IOTD! Thanks, Gray, I shall put that up in the FAQ!
carastro
24 May, 2020 08:04
Perhaps a name change to Notable Image of the Day (as mentioned above) might make people feel it's less like a competition.

I have no personal axe to grind since my images never have and never will be good enough for IOTD, I just like to see fair play, but all the while people feel IOTD is a contest, then they will feel there should be a level playing field.

Carole
Edited 24 May, 2020 08:05
silkpericles
24 May, 2020 08:48
Gary Lopez
I am a big fan of Astrobin. Since joining 2 ½ years ago I have visited the website nearly everyday, often more than once. I have enjoyed wonderful astrophotographs, learned a lot, and made many friends. Despite all of the many positives of my Astrobin experience, however, the loud and contentious public arguments about the IOTD have made Astrobin much less enjoyable. As you all know, this vitriolic debate has reappeared again and again. Last February one of my images was honored at IOTD and became the focus of outrage that argued that it was unworthy of recognition. The argument grew louder and louder, with attacks spreading from Astrobin to my personal photography website used by me and my family.In my judgment, at the heart of the controversy is the notion that IOTD is a competition to recognize “the best” image. As we all know, “best” is a wholly subjective term, not easily defined by quantitatively exact criteria. As a result, the IOTD argument is regularly resurfaced, often by those who feel that their images were unjustly overlooked for recognition. I propose that we think about the IOTD differently. Rather than recognition of “the best image,” let’s make it a recognition of “notable images” that we would like to bring to the attention of the whole AB community. There are many types of images that would be ‘notable.’ Here is a partial list of images that could be considered ‘notable.’

·      An exceptional demonstration of processing skill, which is what we see in the 05-23-20 IOTD by Connor Matherne and the IOTD on 05-16-20 by Alberto Pisabarro. There is a saying in golf, “It is the indian, not the arrow,” which means that no matter how high quality the equipment, the operator is still the most important contributor to success (or failure). We have all seen less-than-distinguished imagery created from professional data. Connor and Alberto are highly skilled astrophotographers that create exceptional imagery no matter what data they have (just look at their galleries).

 ·      A strong RGB DSO image created on the balcony of an apartment in a urban white zone, where the photographer spent months gathering 50 or 60 hours of data to overcome the light pollution. There are many AB contributors who face these challenges and would like to see what dedication and skill can produce.

 ·      A remarkable deep, detailed image created with the state-of-the-art amateur technology (e.g., images created with data from Chilescope, Deep Sky West, etc.). Many of us would enjoy seeing what the best gear and conditions can produce.

·      A planetary, solar, lunar, or other solar system event that is important, unusual, or periodic. We have exceptionally talented planetary, lunar, and solar amateur astrophotographers contributing to AB who are always documenting such events.

·      A strong image from someone who has a large body of work. This would be a way to introduce everyone to members who have been longtime contributors to amateur astronomy.

·      An image of a new discovery made by an AB amateur. A few AB contributors are making significant contribution to science.

·      Images that are “first time displayed on AB.” There are countless exotic objects and phenomena.

 ·      Images from one of the early AB pioneers, such as J-P Matsavainos and Sara Wager, to introduce new member to those who help established AB and helped set the standards for amateur astrophotography.

 ·      and many other types of “notable” images.

I believe that the purpose of the IOTD should be to bring to the attention of the AB audience things that are worth knowing and recognizing. AB is very rich and fast moving. It is easy to miss many wonderful images, collections, events, and people. With this approach, the role of the selection committee could be both editorial and a judgment of quality. The take away of my note is that our community is rich with talented, passionate people. Let’s celebrate them and their work. Let’s remember the reason we came to Astrobin in the first place . . . to share our view of the Universe.

Thank you very much for your kind words Gary, you have made me blush, for the rest I am totally in tune with those that you have exhibited in your comment.
Best regards.
Alberto
Edited 24 May, 2020 08:48
gnomus
24 May, 2020 09:28
Gary Lopez
“It is the indian, not the arrow”

Spot on.  The problem with geting stuck in the mindset, "If only I had this scope, those skies, etcetera", is that is tends to discourage self-analysis, thereby inhibiting development - it is 'safe' though.
Edited 24 May, 2020 09:29
Sky-Jennersdorf
24 May, 2020 09:49
Adam Landefeld
With today's IOTD we have gone from 0.38% to 0.43% of IOTD awarded to professional data in the last 5 years. This truly shines a light on this injustice! Sorry, this feels like recency bias to me.

Good Morning!

Actually 4 out of the last 7 IOTD in this week have been made with own equipment in the own garden or mobile, 3 have been downloaded and just "processed" - using data from commercial remote scopes and pro-data. So it is 43% based on the original definition, not following YOUR very own expression with just data being used from scientific sopces/pro data. You're ignoring what the OP meant.
xordi
24 May, 2020 10:59
There are cca 30% of pro data in top pick (last 60 checked) which is  in my estimation covers 60-80% of all submitted pro data. On the other hand amateur data represented in less then 1% (compared to all amateur submissions - estimate only) in top pick and I think the reason is not because there are no good amateur pics.

Of course almost half of the top pick is pro data, this will be reflected on IOTD as well.

There are definitely 2 parties here, those who likes this direction and who doesn't, and this issue will pop-up again timte to time, and it cannot be handled with comments like "enough" or "boring" or humiliate  each other by making jokes, because there are good arguments pro and con.

There should be a compromised solution, because the current situation seem not working.
Edited 24 May, 2020 11:18
MrsGnomus
24 May, 2020 12:53
xordi
There are cca 30% of pro data in top pick (last 60 checked) which is  in my estimation covers 60-80% of all submitted pro data. On the other hand amateur data represented in less then 1% (compared to all amateur submissions - estimate only) in top pick and I think the reason is not because there are no good amateur pics.Of course almost half of the top pick is pro data, this will be reflected on IOTD as well.

There are definitely 2 parties here, those who likes this direction and who doesn't, and this issue will pop-up again timte to time, and it cannot be handled with comments like "enough" or "boring" or humiliate  each other by making jokes, because there are good arguments pro and con.

There should be a compromised solution, because the current situation seem not working.

I don’t know how you have chosen to categorise the last 60 top picks but I found your assertion that 30% were from “pro data” to be a little surprising. So I thought I’d repeat the exercise.  I found that the last 60 TPS were categorised as follows.

27 - Backyard
7 - Traveller
21 - Own remote observatory (Chilescope = 5, DSW = 5, E-EyE = 2, Other own remote = 9)
2 - Public Amateur Data
2 - Pro Data (Mount Lemmon, Hubble)
1 - Not specified

By my reckoning the pro data is only 3.33% of the last 60 Top Picks.
xordi
24 May, 2020 13:48
Elisabeth Milne
By my reckoning the pro data is only 3.33% of the last 60 Top Picks.

For me everything is pro which is not amateur astrophotography, which means the owner of the picture is operating his own equipment (remote or not, is not relevant. If one is paying for a service in the end to end process or using something which is not own source it is something else. (Dont get me wrong, I like both and I do both and that's why I know it is a big difference., it has sense to differentiate.)

From that perspective the "cca 30%" is a correct number.
hbastro
24 May, 2020 14:54
xordi
Elisabeth Milne
By my reckoning the pro data is only 3.33% of the last 60 Top Picks.

For me everything is pro which is not amateur astrophotography, which means the owner of the picture is operating his own equipment (remote or not, is not relevant. If one is paying for a service in the end to end process or using something which is not own source it is something else. (Dont get me wrong, I like both and I do both and that's why I know it is a big difference., it has sense to differentiate.)

From that perspective the "cca 30%" is a correct number.

Great discussions and agreed: but why stop there. If you didn't make some portion of your equipment it is pro. You just purchase everything set it up and go. Then complain about how unfortunate your conditions are, and how difficult operating from your back yard is. Given that very few here have actualy made any portion of their gear, or written any of their code, the pro data distinction seems irrelevant …its all pro…

Might be better to sit back and enjoy the great images on Astrobin and not be so concerned about data from your pro equipment verses data from someone elses pro equipment…
Edited 24 May, 2020 15:01
gnomus
24 May, 2020 15:04
hbastro
If you didn't make some portion of your equipment it is pro. You just purchase everything set it up and go.

Great point.  And agreed - these 'backyard' folks do appear to show a lack of …. commitment, if you ask me…  smile
 
Register or login to create to post a reply.