So how would you like it if AstroBin let you choose how you want to input your acquisition sessions:
Easy mode:
Total hours per filter type
Month and year
Accurate mode:
(the current implementation)
The pros of the easy mode would be that you're done quickly, and you are encouraged to be approximate. E.g. never mind the minute, it's just hours because the point is that approximate data is better than no data. Got your image over the spans of multiple months? Screw it, just input the middle month or whatever.
The risk is that this encourages people to take the easy route and under-document their images. I suppose most viewer don't care about every single detail, and if you don't care about accurately recording the information, why should you be forced?
I'm sure lots of people already do this: just input one date, and the total number x duration.
What are your thoughts? I struggle because I want to make things easy for you, but I feel like this would be a step back in terms of AstroBin's mission.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Salvatore Iovene:
So how would you like it if AstroBin let you choose how you want to input your acquisition sessions:
Easy mode:
Total hours per filter type
Month and year
Accurate mode:
(the current implementation)
The pros of the easy mode would be that you're done quickly, and you are encouraged to be approximate. E.g. never mind the minute, it's just hours because the point is that approximate data is better than no data. Got your image over the spans of multiple months? Screw it, just input the middle month or whatever.
The risk is that this encourages people to take the easy route and under-document their images. I suppose most viewer don't care about every single detail, and if you don't care about accurately recording the information, why should you be forced?
I'm sure lots of people already do this: just input one date, and the total number x duration.
What are your thoughts? I struggle because I want to make things easy for you, but I feel like this would be a step back in terms of AstroBin's mission. Hi Salvatore, It is easy enough now for people to just enter approximate information, so I'm not sure the purpose of you spending your precision time adding anything fancy to do what one can do now. And as you say, to encourage it doesn't seem to be the best option. I would suggest the best time spent would be to make entry of more data easier, if anyone has suggestions there. I find the copy option really helpful for multiple nights , to me that makes it quite easy and painless. I do like to be accurate and complete if I can with my own data, then I know I can always find the information later on AB when I need it. Otherwise sure to get lost in my own files... CS Rick
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Yeah, I agree with you, Rick. As somebody mentioned above, this is not about UX, but about the data. If the data is complex, there's going to be no easy way to input it.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Salvatore Iovene:
So how would you like it if AstroBin let you choose how you want to input your acquisition sessions:
Easy mode:
Total hours per filter type
Month and year
Accurate mode:
(the current implementation)
The pros of the easy mode would be that you're done quickly, and you are encouraged to be approximate. E.g. never mind the minute, it's just hours because the point is that approximate data is better than no data. Got your image over the spans of multiple months? Screw it, just input the middle month or whatever.
The risk is that this encourages people to take the easy route and under-document their images. I suppose most viewer don't care about every single detail, and if you don't care about accurately recording the information, why should you be forced?
I'm sure lots of people already do this: just input one date, and the total number x duration.
What are your thoughts? I struggle because I want to make things easy for you, but I feel like this would be a step back in terms of AstroBin's mission. I would not support an easy mode. I think that would dilute the resource. As it is, we can be specific easily about everything but the dates. Maybe if there was a way to select all the dates that went into the data set in one move? Like a calendar where you select all the dates that you imaged and then put the number of subs per channel? This would be more informative than putting all the data per channel into 1 single date. It doesn't provide the granularity of data per day, but it might be a way to provide a little more information without compromising on the essential stuff. Again, this is really only for those of us that have data across many days i have one target with multiple filters across 20+ nights!
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Salvatore Iovene:
So how would you like it if AstroBin let you choose how you want to input your acquisition sessions:
Easy mode:
Total hours per filter type
Month and year
Accurate mode:
(the current implementation)
The pros of the easy mode would be that you're done quickly, and you are encouraged to be approximate. E.g. never mind the minute, it's just hours because the point is that approximate data is better than no data. Got your image over the spans of multiple months? Screw it, just input the middle month or whatever.
The risk is that this encourages people to take the easy route and under-document their images. I suppose most viewer don't care about every single detail, and if you don't care about accurately recording the information, why should you be forced?
I'm sure lots of people already do this: just input one date, and the total number x duration.
What are your thoughts? I struggle because I want to make things easy for you, but I feel like this would be a step back in terms of AstroBin's mission. Salvatore, I wouldn’t want to see the “easy way out” option here either. I personally prefer the way things are and others are already kind of doing the quick combining of subs already. Maybe like Chris was mentioning something where they can use a calendar that allows you to select multiple dates for that month and then the total subs per filter??? Seems like a happy medium option??? For me I’ll continue to input my data the way I already do as it doesn't really bother me at all. Dale
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Dale Penkala:
Maybe like Chris was mentioning something where they can use a calendar that allows you to select multiple dates for that month and then the total subs per filter??? Seems like a happy medium option??? For me I’ll continue to input my data the way I already do as it doesn't really bother me at all. This is almost the same as the simplified method I proposed. Technically speaking, it's doable (tho not very easy because it means revisiting a lot of assumptions in the code). I do plan to pay some attention to acquisitions in the near future, for instance to add support for mosaic panels, and assign specific setups to specific acquisitions (useful for collaborations). I'll look into the feasibility of doing something like that then!
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Thanks sal!
I know we don't have a ton of "votes" but it's interesting to me that 2/3 take a very meticulous approach to this info. I would have guessed it was lower, likely because of my own bias. Look forward to your continuous platform evolution.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
This is an interesting question, I have swung between the two extremes. Mostly dependent on how dedicated I am to dig up the minute details. As a consumer of others details, I am interested overall totals and per channel totals to give me an idea of how to approach a target. Especially if it is near same equipment details. The data upload process as improved over years, so I should side more toward the more details as @Salvatore Iovene makes it easier and easier.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
So. . .I just uploaded a four-panel mosaic captured on 36 nights over three months. I was really dreading this one, because as I said above, I meticulously enter all the details. Instead, I used the Steve Greaves script that Robert Žibreg so graciously pointed out at the beginning of this discussion. I was prepared for this to take me at least two hours of mind-numbing, soul-sucking work. But with the script, the entire upload process from generating the detailed data with the script to dragging and dropping the image and to seeing the image displayed on Astrobin took 7 minutes.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
I am not sure I understand this thread?? I don't seem to have an issue. I only have to make as many acquisition entries as either number of dates or number of filter/ time/gain/bin combos - whichever item (date or filter acquisition info combo) is larger.
I enter each acquisition date accurately (by start date). I enter filter exposure data by filter (number, time, gain, etc). But I enter this exposure data distributed over the various dates on which I imaged (regardless of which date that filter exposure actually occurred). The result is pretty satisfactory.
Here are some examples copied directly from some of my technical pages:
Example one - single date -
Dates:
April 20, 2023
Frames:
Astronomik Type 2c Blue 36 mm: 24×120″(48′) (gain: 121.00) bin 1×1
Astronomik Type 2c Green 36 mm: 24×120″(48′) (gain: 121.00) bin 1×1
Astronomik Type 2c Red 36 mm: 24×120″(48′) (gain: 121.00) bin 1×1
Astronomik Type 2c Red 36 mm: 72×180″(3h 36′) (gain: 121.00) bin 1×1
Integration:
6h
Example two - three dates, five filters -
Dates:
Aug. 10, 2023
Aug. 12, 2023
Aug. 16, 2023
Frames:
Baader Blue (B-CCD) 36 mm: 40×120″(1h 20′) (gain: 121.00) bin 2×2
Baader Green (G-CCD) 36 mm: 40×120″(1h 20′) (gain: 121.00) bin 2×2
Baader H-alpha 6.5nm (CMOS-Optimized) 36 mm: 64×210″(3h 44′) (gain: 140.00) bin 2×2
Baader Red (R-CCD) 36 mm: 40×120″(1h 20′) (gain: 121.00) bin 2×2
Baader UV/IR CUT Luminance (CMOS Optimized) 36 mm: 128×180″(6h 24′) (gain: 121.00) bin 2×2
Integration:
14h 8′
Example 3 - multiple dates, four filters, limited exposure each night ( for only 9+ hours over 4 nights) -
Dates:
Sept. 8, 2023
Sept. 15, 2023
Oct. 8, 2023
Oct. 13, 2023
Frames:
Baader Blue (B-CCD) 36 mm: 40×120″(1h 20′) (gain: 121.00) bin 2×2
Baader Green (G-CCD) 36 mm: 40×120″(1h 20′) (gain: 121.00) bin 2×2
Baader Red (R-CCD) 36 mm: 40×120″(1h 20′) (gain: 121.00) bin 2×2
Baader UV/IR CUT Luminance (CMOS Optimized) 36 mm: 112×180″(5h 36′) (gain: 121.00) bin 2×2
Integration:
9h 36′
I find these presentations of acquisition cover the important information in a succinct manner that is relatively easily entered. Am I missing something? |
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
