Remote imaging & using other people's data

[Carole]

I frequent Astrobin as its a great site and I am now one of the Moderators for picking IOTD.   

I am really shocked at the number of people who submit images of Data they did not capture themselves or taken from a remote observatory which they didn't set up themselves, and these images are picked alongside those that imagers take with their own blood and sweat from their local areas which does not seem to be fair play to me.  I did mention this in one of the forum posts, but was told it was a contentious issue that had been debated a fair amount in the past and having seen the VERY fractious debate on the way IOTD is chosen about 18 months ago I decided not to pursue it any further. 

What's your opinion on imaging from a remote location using gear you haven't set up yourself, or even worse using Hubble data or similar?  As far as I am concerned, it is just a processing exercise and cheating. 

I shall continue to be a Moderator, as I am seeing some great images (even besides the remote ones in question), and finding a fair number of targets I didn't know existed.

Personally I think there should be two different categories, and will try to suggest that at the end of my tenure.  At least I have managed to get the "runners up" a badge as a Top Pick thanks to a thread I started.

Carole

[JohnP]

ha ha Fay knows all about this eh Fay..  

or even worse using Hubble data or similar?

Must admit agree with you on this.. If you are capturing data remotely on some 'top of the range kit' all you are essentially doing is processing so maybe there should be 2 categories - IOTD & POTD I have a real 'bugbear' with some of the images APOD keeps using - all the artyf**ty ones, non astro ones & repeats from years gone by - seems such a shame when you have imagers' like Mark getting the results they get...

[Mac]

Personally I think if you have take the image theirselves then that should be higher up the list.
Using other people images as your own is frowned upon in my opinion, reprocessed or not, and should really only be considered if you have absolutely nothing else to look at.

Whats your view Fay, 

Light blue touch paper and hide.

Mac.

[The Thing]

I agree, if you haven't taken it with your own kit it should be in a processing category, not an image category. I am not too fussed if personal kit is remotely located e.g in Spain as it's not too different to sticking it in the car and taking it to a dark site, you still had to select the gear and make it work and then capture the target and process it. Using a 1+m scope in timbuctu with a vast selection of filters etc. all profesionally maintained is like downloading NASA data and processing it, a processing excerise not a system design and constrcution,  acquisition to finished image.

[MarkS]

I definitely agree.  If it's not your equipment then it goes in a different category.  For instance, the RMG Astronomy Photographer of the Year has a robotic category:

For the purposes of this competition, a robotic telescope is considered to be one that is operated via the internet and is publically available to all, such as Faulkes, Slooh, NSO, Global Remote Telescope Network (GRAS), LightBuckets, Liverpool, etc. 'Publically available' means that it must be possible to book time (including for a fee) on the robotic telescope.

I've nothing against folk processing Hubble data (you often see them on APOD) or data from a scope where time has been booked but in all cases it should be made clear.

BTW I've downloaded raw Hubble data to process and it's a real pig to process - missing columns etc.  If you bought such a camera from QHY, SBIG, Atik, SX, QSI, FLI, Moravian, Orion etc you'd send it straight back!

Mark

[Carole]

I thought and hoped you would all agree with me on this.  I do agree with Duncan that if you have actually bought and set up kit in a remote location then its a different matter, its your kit and you made it all work properly.

To be fair they do state that the image was using Hubble or Liverpool data etc or whether it was done remotely such as Deep Sky West in Mexico, but what I object to is these images being put up against those taken in people's back yards, or at astro camps etc which they have set up themselves.  Sometimes they win too.

I really think there should be a separate category and will suggest it at a later date, but I don't want to make too much fuss at this juncture.  After all I just managed to get the Top Picks award through, so don't want to push my luck.

For the hell of it I have downloaded some data from DSW which is available publicly, I have processed it, it looks great but feel no enthusiasm to post it because it's not my image.  Which incidentally is stacked and clipped before you even start. 

Carole

[Carole]

Well this has got me down sufficiently to complain to the Web Host that I do not think it is a fair playing field and that these remote imagers are nothing but Image Processors and that there should be a separate IOTD for Backyard imagers.

I am not sure I want to continue spending my time pandering to these "so called imagers" who invariably get picked for IOTD and have no conscience at all about posting the result up as their own image. 

I will probably end up resigning as a Moderator, but at least i will have said my piece.

Carole

[ApophisAstros]

For my "2 penneth" , I think that the thrill of the hunt is everything and actually capturing images is at least as pleasing as processing and playing with data , although i do feel like i'm opening a  Xmas present during processing as you never know what you'll get!...Forest Gump and his box of chocolates.
Roger

[Carole]

What skill is there in just doing the processing.  Any-one who has never ever touched a telescope, but is good at IT could learn to process images without even getting off their backside. 

Well the web host has agreed he should sort out provision for Back Yard IOTD, so lets see what happens.  I bet those Image Processors will complain because they seem to have infected the whole of Astrobin and there are hoards of them from all over the world. 

Well some-one has to stand up for the Back Yard Imager (i.e. those who actually get off their butt and capture the data from their own equipment). 

Carole

[Hugh]

Not into astrophotography as you know but can fully understand your principle Carole and totally agree.  To me , as an outsider, you are either an astronomer with a particular skill or just a pretty picture editor ~ for me pretty clear cut!

Way to go (as the Americans say)!

Best

Hugh

[Carole]

Interesting progress has been made on this.  A couple of days ago one of the people who posts up only Hubble data and professional observatory data posted up a thread on Astrobin forum, he also had a discussion with the Website owner. 

He wanted to "improve" the way IOTD was chosen.  (Personally i think with the new influx of moderators he is not getting as many pats on the back as he used to and this was all designed to improve things for himself). 

He wanted to make sure the moderators knew what they were doing by having a certain rating on Astrobin, well lets face it the people who get that rating are those who process the professional data in the first place as currently they are at an advantage.  He wanted to exclude certain images, such as Aurora, ground based images of satellites and sky scapes etc and wanted to put a restriction on how many IOTD or Top Picks any-one could get in a month.

Well it has back fired on him spectacularly, as lots of people objected to most of his proposals, and it gave me an opportunity to jump in with my argument that downloaded data should not be compared to DIY data. 

The result is loads of people have agreed with me, a few remote imagers have thrown their dummies out of the pram (it's been quite amusing at times), and I am currently optimistic for real change as some of the more prominent people on there are now asking how complicated it would be to set up different categories.   

I have learnt that downloaded data from professional observatories etc is not as straight forward as one would imagine, but that still only requires plenty of IT skills as opposed to capturing skills. 

Watch this space.

Carole

[ApophisAstros]

It would be nice to have different IOTD for DSLRS and CCD's ,but even then i couldnt compete with the Sony A7 users.
Roger

[Hugh]

Hang on in there Carole ~ sounds like change is on the way as to different categories (only seems right to me as an outsider).  Of course the downloaders will be annoyed as they will only top a category, and not be IOTM (or whatever) overall.  Much less Kudos!  Could even find them gradually sidelined.

There has probably been a festering feeling out there and you just needed to pop your head over the parapet to get it going.

When your right your right!

Hugh

[Carole]

Well its good news, that there is finally going to be a POLL on how the IOTD is chosen. 

The bad news is I got so fed up with the attitudes of some of the people on there I lost all enthusiasm for helping to select the IOTD that I resigned as a moderator, but if the outcome is going to be fairer that's all that matters.

Watch this space.

Carole

[MarkS]

Well its good news, that there is finally going to be a POLL on how the IOTD is chosen. 

The bad news is I got so fed up with the attitudes of some of the people on there I lost all enthusiasm for helping to select the IOTD that I resigned as a moderator, but if the outcome is going to be fairer that's all that matters.

What a shame you felt you had to resign.  I do understand it though.  Some forums (OAS excepted) really do bring out the worst in people.

Mark