Return to the Cloudy Nights Telescope Reviews home page


Astrophotography and Sketching >> Astro Imaging/Sketching Contest

Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | (show all)
Greg K.Administrator

*****

Reged: 12/11/03

Loc: Clifton Park, NY
Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion
      #953160 - 05/12/06 06:20 PM

Please post any comments or questions about the imaging contest or the forum submissions here.

Edited by Greg K. (06/13/06 08:00 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Charlie HeinAdministrator
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 11/02/03

Loc: 26.06.08N, +80.23.08W
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: Greg K.]
      #953938 - 05/13/06 08:40 AM

Wow... too many really good ones this month!

Charlie

Edited by Greg K. (06/13/06 08:00 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jim Nelson
scholastic sledgehammer


Reged: 05/10/05

Loc: SE Michigan
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: Greg K.]
      #998732 - 06/14/06 01:31 AM

The order of the first and third items are switched in the poll versus the images.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Greg K.Administrator

*****

Reged: 12/11/03

Loc: Clifton Park, NY
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: Jim Nelson]
      #1003847 - 06/17/06 02:45 PM

yeah, i don't know how that happened. I'm pretty sure I entered them in the same order.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Greg K.Administrator

*****

Reged: 12/11/03

Loc: Clifton Park, NY
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: Greg K.]
      #1042881 - 07/13/06 09:22 PM

Well if anyone is wondering when the June contest will start, it looks like polling for the CCD forum won't be done until the 18th, So we'll be holding the overall contest a little late this month.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
rumples riot
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 07/01/04

Loc: South Australia
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: Greg K.]
      #1048779 - 07/18/06 06:43 AM

When is the poll chaps?

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Greg K.Administrator

*****

Reged: 12/11/03

Loc: Clifton Park, NY
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: rumples riot]
      #1049186 - 07/18/06 12:37 PM

I should be setting that up today.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
UrbanStarSeeker
sage


Reged: 04/23/06

Loc: Fountain, CO, USA
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: Greg K.]
      #1051170 - 07/19/06 04:44 PM

I can't see Eric's image, is an error on the poll or is it just me?

Allan


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Greg K.Administrator

*****

Reged: 12/11/03

Loc: Clifton Park, NY
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: UrbanStarSeeker]
      #1051300 - 07/19/06 06:11 PM

I can see it. Did you try refreshing the page?

Is anyone else having this problem?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
UrbanStarSeeker
sage


Reged: 04/23/06

Loc: Fountain, CO, USA
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: Greg K.]
      #1051638 - 07/19/06 09:58 PM

Yeah, I tried refreshing...actually I don't see it in the submissions thread either unless I select the Attachments link in the post header. Must be a Firefox issue.

Allan


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Greg K.Administrator

*****

Reged: 12/11/03

Loc: Clifton Park, NY
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: UrbanStarSeeker]
      #1052392 - 07/20/06 11:19 AM

FWIW, I can see it in Firefox (Windows, 1.5.0.4) too.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
UrbanStarSeeker
sage


Reged: 04/23/06

Loc: Fountain, CO, USA
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: Greg K.]
      #1052496 - 07/20/06 12:16 PM

I found the problem. The filename of his image has "ADS" in it. Apparently the Adblock + Adblock Filterset G extentions have an overzealous filter that is blocking the image. I disabled Adblock and it worked fine. I just white-listed Cloudy Nights so the problem won't occur again. Sorry for the trouble.

Allan


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Greg K.Administrator

*****

Reged: 12/11/03

Loc: Clifton Park, NY
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: UrbanStarSeeker]
      #1052563 - 07/20/06 01:03 PM

Not a problem! Glad you figured it out.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
thelittleman
Vendor (Peter's Actions)
*****

Reged: 05/21/05

Loc: Hampshire, UK
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: Greg K.]
      #1518495 - 04/01/07 11:18 AM

Just a suggestion...
I think there should be a (locked) post which contains the winners each month. That way it would be easy to look at the best of CN over a period of time, rather than having to scroll through all the previous posts...

Thanks,


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
SteelersNation
sage


Reged: 09/07/06

Loc: Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: thelittleman]
      #1738829 - 07/25/07 05:02 PM

good idea.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Charlie HeinAdministrator
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 11/02/03

Loc: 26.06.08N, +80.23.08W
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: SteelersNation]
      #1751480 - 08/01/07 12:56 PM

Very good idea Pete - I'll get that together as soon as I can!

Charlie


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
markseibold
Carpal Tunnel


Reged: 01/19/08

Loc: Portland Oregon
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: thelittleman]
      #2537234 - 07/23/08 06:34 PM

Peter et al

I am not sure I understand this suggestion but I assume that you have a good idea here about posting the contest submissions.

I have had several people write to me personally and ask why I have not won a contest yet as they seem to think I have been featured more in NASA web sites and soon to be in the Coast to Coast AM site (next week July 27 ~ Aug 2.

I do not really concern myself with winning contests- I just hope to share what I do with my astronomy art in hopes that it inspires others to try.

Am I not submitting my works properly for art contests?

I hope to hear from Charlie, Erika and other moderators or anyones advice,

thanks
Mark


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Rob B
newbie


Reged: 09/26/07

Loc: England, South Coast
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: markseibold]
      #2638896 - 09/12/08 03:54 PM

I think you guys do amazing things with modest equipment. Truly a triumph of inventiveness over budget. I live in an area of very bad light pollution, so I don't even own a telescope these days. I have to get my kicks by writing software to manipulate and explore FITS images from professional telescopes. Consequently I have something of an understanding of how talented these entries are. Keep it up - us townies appreciate it!

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
markseibold
Carpal Tunnel


Reged: 01/19/08

Loc: Portland Oregon
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: thelittleman]
      #3099775 - 05/12/09 04:44 AM

Quote:

Just a suggestion...
I think there should be a (locked) post which contains the winners each month. That way it would be easy to look at the best of CN over a period of time, rather than having to scroll through all the previous posts...

Thanks,




To all

Did this suggestion from Littleman ever materialize?

Thanks for any info,

Mark


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Charlie HeinAdministrator
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 11/02/03

Loc: 26.06.08N, +80.23.08W
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: markseibold]
      #3108367 - 05/16/09 11:10 AM

Hi Mark - never did get that together. I do eventually plan on doing it but to be honest it's not a high priority project at the moment... you can see that the poll threads are pretty much all that's in this forum, so if you want to have a look over time it's easy enough to do.

That said I will try to put aside some time to get this accomplished in the near future.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
markseibold
Carpal Tunnel


Reged: 01/19/08

Loc: Portland Oregon
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: Charlie Hein]
      #3122766 - 05/23/09 12:41 PM

Charlie has completed the new contest winners post over the entire span of years for every month in chronological time. This is beautiful to see. What a display! Some of the amateur photographers approach the quality of the Hubble.

There were others who asked about the sketching winners over the photographers but I do not think this new post indicates that.

Is there a way to determine that count without much research?

Thanks again for any information from any of you.

Mark

Edited by markseibold (05/23/09 12:43 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Charlie HeinAdministrator
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 11/02/03

Loc: 26.06.08N, +80.23.08W
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: markseibold]
      #3122889 - 05/23/09 01:51 PM

I did a tabulation on this - see the lead post in the thread.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Charlie HeinAdministrator
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 11/02/03

Loc: 26.06.08N, +80.23.08W
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: Charlie Hein]
      #4838947 - 10/02/11 10:20 AM

I have a very cool rules change announcement to make, and I also have a request for a rules change that I want to bring before the group for discussion.

First, the rule change. I've been looking for this for a very long while and now it is reality... the forum polls are no longer "hard coded" at a 100KB (102,400 bytes) file size limit. They will now follow whatever the site wide rules for image file size and dimension are. Please note that at the present time this has been set to 200KB (204,800 bytes) in file size (on a trial basis), and 800px x 800px in image dimension.

Since this file size limitation may change over time (either up or down), The rules will be amended to accommodate this like so:

Quote:

6. Entries must conform in all respects with the site wide image posting requirements. Entries that do not meet this criteria will be disqualified at the time of the semi final poll creation. It is the contestant's responsibility to ensure compliance with these requirements - although a moderator or administrator may alert a contestant to a possible problem in this area they are not bound to do so.





Now for the rules change request... I was recently asked if a member would be able to "legally" post images from a remote observatory. The member has a sort of "co-op" arrangement with another fellow for equipping and operating the observatory. My understanding is that this is not a "pay to play" remote observatory like Lightbuckets or Slooh, these guys have their own equipment installed in the observatory and share the operations and expenses of the site.

As we discussed the situation it became clear that this would not be permitted under the strict interpretation of our current rule #9:

Quote:

10. Entries must represent the work of a single individual. You must setup and operate all equipment yourself, capture all exposures (or perform any sketching) yourself and process the resulting entry yourself.




Obviously, with the observatory being in a remote location and as there is equipment in there that he didn't install, our member would be in violation of rule #9 and so he can't submit any photos taken from the remote observatory.

This is the point of the discussion for a change to rule #9. Should we allow images from systems that you didn't completely set up yourself?

There are a number of scenarios that might be affected by this rule besides the "co-op" observatory referenced above. For example, what about members of a family with a home observatory? Members of an astronomy club that have outfitted a club observatory? Could family or members of a club be considered "co-owners" of the equipment? If so, they will almost certainly have not completely set up the equipment they use - in fact the only way to be certain that the operator set up all the equipment is if it was a portable setup.

It's an interesting question and one I'd like to talk over with you folks before making any changes to the rules.

What do you think?

Charlie


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
roc.ls1864
Pooh-Bah


Reged: 08/16/10

Loc: Blue Ridge Mtns. of Virginia.
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: Charlie Hein]
      #4838979 - 10/02/11 10:34 AM

Perhaps rule 9 should only apply to the 'Beginner" categories, as I doubt many "beginners' have remote obsevatories. My humble opinion

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
zerro1
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 08/02/09

Loc: Smokey Point , 48.12°N 122.25...
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: roc.ls1864]
      #4839400 - 10/02/11 02:03 PM

In it's current form, there is no way to be fair in the Imaging/Sketching Contest. It's not even about what's fair it's supposed to be about "the best image produced" by members of CN.. That's all there is. If you want it to be fair then it's a lot more complicated. When a guy with an OSC is trying to compete against someone with a monochrome camera with an 8 position filter wheel loaded with NB an LRGB filters...how is that fair? How is two or three people pooling their resources going to be fair when competing against somone with a $600 dollar mount that drives 300 miles to get to some place with decent sky?

It would be completely self serving for me to totally object to this change...

In fact I think there is an un-intended exclusion that causes me to agree with a change. What about the guy who still has the desire and ability but physical limitations exclude him from going out and setting up? Maybe he/she, has to enlist aid or just plane have someone else set up? Here is a great reason to be in a cooperative! why should the rules preclude that person from taking part?

There's my 2 cents


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Charlie HeinAdministrator
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 11/02/03

Loc: 26.06.08N, +80.23.08W
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: zerro1]
      #4840062 - 10/02/11 07:29 PM

Quote:

In it's current form, there is no way to be fair in the Imaging/Sketching Contest. It's not even about what's fair it's supposed to be about "the best image produced" by members of CN.. That's all there is. If you want it to be fair then it's a lot more complicated. When a guy with an OSC is trying to compete against someone with a monochrome camera with an 8 position filter wheel loaded with NB an LRGB filters...how is that fair? How is two or three people pooling their resources going to be fair when competing against somone with a $600 dollar mount that drives 300 miles to get to some place with decent sky?




Robert, there's no way to have a perfectly fair and level playing field unless we put everyone together on the same field with the same equipment on the same night shooting the same target and processing it with identical computers and software. That's just not possible.

When you look at the Winner's Gallery it is very true that you see plenty of high end gear in that list of winners - but there are also plenty of winners that have modest gear as well. On any given month those folks must have beat out others with high end gear, because that high end gear is always in the competition.


Quote:

In fact I think there is an un-intended exclusion that causes me to agree with a change. What about the guy who still has the desire and ability but physical limitations exclude him from going out and setting up? Maybe he/she, has to enlist aid or just plane have someone else set up? Here is a great reason to be in a cooperative! why should the rules preclude that person from taking part?




Well, That's a great example. In fact that's why it is important to talk these things through.

Charlie


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Charlie HeinAdministrator
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 11/02/03

Loc: 26.06.08N, +80.23.08W
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: roc.ls1864]
      #4840067 - 10/02/11 07:33 PM

Quote:

Perhaps rule 9 should only apply to the 'Beginner" categories, as I doubt many "beginners' have remote obsevatories. My humble opinion




It's not just remote observatories that we're talking about here. There are many possible scenarios - Robert just brought up one about disabled people who physically couldn't build the gear but could possibly run it.

Charlie


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
zerro1
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 08/02/09

Loc: Smokey Point , 48.12°N 122.25...
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: Charlie Hein]
      #4840481 - 10/02/11 11:35 PM

Quote:

Robert, there's no way to have a perfectly fair and level playing field unless we put everyone together on the same field with the same equipment on the same night shooting the same target and processing it with identical computers and software. That's just not possible.




That's my point, it not possible, it's not required. I certainly don't expect anyone to try slanting anything to make it "fair"

My only contention is and has been to allow people to follow a link to a higher quality versiion of the image posted in the Imaging/Sketching contest. Even the problem with that is...if said image wins, that higher res version isn't going to be the "winning image" posted. It's going to be the lower res...So..No matter what it's "catch 22"..

Edited by zerro1 (10/02/11 11:37 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
John Wunderlin
Vendor - Spike-a Focusing Mask
*****

Reged: 10/01/04

Loc: Mineral Point, Wi
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: zerro1]
      #4842713 - 10/04/11 01:36 AM

It would be nice to raise the file size limitation. Depending on the target and the star field, sometimes compressing down to 100k really damages the images. I think 200k is a much more reasonable size for an 800x800 resolution image.

As for the remote observatory, I think it's ok as long as you are the one running the equipment. As you say, it will never be completely 'fair' and I think only the beginner forum even tries for the fairness issue- I think it does a nice job of that by 'graduating' winners so one person can't dominate as they advance.

Don't get me wrong, though- I want the CCD forum to stay open to all. Beginner contestants should work on the beginner contest if they want to 'win'. I think they could also join the CCD, but be aware they're in for some seriously stiff competition

It's all in fun anyway If the grand prize were $1 Million, then we'd have to really watch those rules!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
lacomj
sage
*****

Reged: 09/06/09

Loc: Reno, NV
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: John Wunderlin]
      #4844446 - 10/05/11 12:28 AM

Some good discussion here...

I think the file size upgrade to 200k is a no brainer. If someone is going to look at an imaging contest thread, they are certainly going to expect to see nice images at the expense of a bit of bandwidth. As I have said elsewhere here, as an entrant, it is very discouraging to have to lower the quality to enter an image. The fact that everyone has to do this (level playing field) misses this point.

On the matter of remote or shared equipment, I say go for it, but stopping short of the pay-by-the-hour services that really do nearly all of the data gathering for you. As has been pointed out well above, this will never be truly fair when it comes to equipment, and I think that the advantage of access to a remote observatory co-op is FAR less than the advantage that a $30,000 astrograph setup will give you in imaging... they are both just facts of life and should be "legal".

More broadly, I support the idea of collaborative entries as well. It is healthy for the hobby to bring people together who desire such activities.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
SL63 AMG
scholastic sledgehammer
*****

Reged: 12/21/09

Loc: Williamson, Arizona
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: Charlie Hein]
      #4846266 - 10/05/11 11:34 PM

No matter what decision you arrive upon, one thing is for certain. Operating from a fixed observatory, whether remote or at your house, is a huge advantage over setting up a "portable" system, whether in your driveway, or at a remote dark site.

In my opinion, if there is any distinction in categories, it should be between permanent and portable imaging, rather than remote and local imaging.

Dave


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Charlie HeinAdministrator
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 11/02/03

Loc: 26.06.08N, +80.23.08W
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: lacomj]
      #4847165 - 10/06/11 12:56 PM

Quote:

Some good discussion here...

I think the file size upgrade to 200k is a no brainer. If someone is going to look at an imaging contest thread, they are certainly going to expect to see nice images at the expense of a bit of bandwidth. As I have said elsewhere here, as an entrant, it is very discouraging to have to lower the quality to enter an image. The fact that everyone has to do this (level playing field) misses this point.




Of course, you should be aware that the "level playing field" comments are somewhat tongue in cheek and don't really explain the point of file size constraints.

In each forum thread "page" there are 20 "posts" as a default. Each of these "posts" can have from one to as many images as the reader cares to link imbedded in them. Since all 20 "posts" are downloaded at one time, it is the cumulative size of all the images on a page that determines how fast the page will load. This is one of the main reasons why there are rules regarding the file size of an individual image - the bigger each one is, the longer it takes for the entire page to load.

There is a conscious effort on the part of CN to make sure that the user experience is good for everyone who may visit. Some folks have good internet connections and some do not. We see this file size issue as a way to make it best as we can for everyone.

EDIT: We have up to now disallowed links to "full resolution" images for this contest. Changing that rule might be a compromise on the file size issue, but again there would need to be broad support for it.

Charlie

Edited by Charlie Hein (10/06/11 01:00 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
lacomj
sage
*****

Reged: 09/06/09

Loc: Reno, NV
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: Charlie Hein]
      #4852233 - 10/09/11 02:27 PM

Thanks Charlie...that clarifies the underlying reasons much better for me and makes sense as a constraint.

Perhaps increase the file size constraint on ONLY the contest threads, and reduce the default number of posts per page to a more manageable number? We don't seem to get more than about 5-10 entries each month (varies of course). Those who upload earliest will get the benefit of being on the front page (if it ever goes beyond the default number).

As it is now, various forums have a LOT of off-site link redirects to larger images just as a regular course of business. That seems to work fairly well, but I would favor having a decent quality image (200k) right inline for the contests. It would be a bit of a hassle to be following through links when voting and comparing favorites.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Dave Kodama
sage


Reged: 10/04/10

Loc: CA, USA
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: Charlie Hein]
      #4852240 - 10/09/11 02:35 PM

You can count me in for allowing *supplemental* links to larger images. Limiting images to less than 1 megapixel resolution is absurd when HD TV does better than that. OK to limit the size of the "thumbnail" actually posted in the forum, but let us see the full quality and the shot in all its full glory, no matter if it's a single frame or a huge mosaic.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Charlie HeinAdministrator
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 11/02/03

Loc: 26.06.08N, +80.23.08W
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: lacomj]
      #4852619 - 10/09/11 07:07 PM

Quote:

Perhaps increase the file size constraint on ONLY the contest threads, and reduce the default number of posts per page to a more manageable number? We don't seem to get more than about 5-10 entries each month (varies of course). Those who upload earliest will get the benefit of being on the front page (if it ever goes beyond the default number).




I don't know if the default number of posts can be set on a per forum basis or if it's a global variable - I'll have to check. Even so, I'm fairly certain that the default number of posts can't be changed on a thread specific basis, which is what would be needed.

Quote:

As it is now, various forums have a LOT of off-site link redirects to larger images just as a regular course of business. That seems to work fairly well, but I would favor having a decent quality image (200k) right inline for the contests. It would be a bit of a hassle to be following through links when voting and comparing favorites.




Mike at Astronomics has authorized a 200K file size limit on a trial basis so that we can understand how this works for us.

However, the file dimension limits have been maintained at 800px X 800px. The dimension limitation is to avoid the usability problem you get when someone loads a big image (in dimension) or posts a very long URL - the forum controls slide off-screen to the right. The current 800px limit accomodates a 1024 x 768 resolution screen, which has been shown to be the most popular screen size world wide.

Many if not most imagers these days deliver images that are much wider than 800px. Allowing folks to link to their full-sized image would cater to the majority of the folks entering the contests and still maintain the usability factor. On the other hand, shrinking a large image down to 800px can hide a multitude of sins.

Charlie


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Charlie HeinAdministrator
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 11/02/03

Loc: 26.06.08N, +80.23.08W
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: Dave Kodama]
      #4852625 - 10/09/11 07:10 PM

Quote:

You can count me in for allowing *supplemental* links to larger images. Limiting images to less than 1 megapixel resolution is absurd when HD TV does better than that. OK to limit the size of the "thumbnail" actually posted in the forum, but let us see the full quality and the shot in all its full glory, no matter if it's a single frame or a huge mosaic.




I'd support carrying the linked images over to the "winners" galleries as well, so that folks can see the image at full size if desired.

On the other hand, the rule disallowing links was implemented as a result of conversations just like this one a few years back. I personally would feel better about changing that particular rule if we could hear from some of those folks to see if the reasons they chose to go that route still apply.

Charlie


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
John Wunderlin
Vendor - Spike-a Focusing Mask
*****

Reged: 10/01/04

Loc: Mineral Point, Wi
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: Charlie Hein]
      #4852707 - 10/09/11 07:55 PM

I think the 200k limit is great- Most of the time I think we can get a decent image at 800 pixels + 200k while still not burying the servers (or at least any more than we already do)

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
zerro1
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 08/02/09

Loc: Smokey Point , 48.12°N 122.25...
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: Charlie Hein]
      #4852732 - 10/09/11 08:11 PM

I've made my feelings clear that allowing a separate link is good. the dillema of course; are the votes for the winner a result of the off-site image? technically it's not the one that the vote is supposed to be cast for. (I'm trying to look at it from all sides here)

Quote:

I'd support carrying the linked images over to the "winners" galleries as well, so that folks can see the image at full size if desired




I think that would be great! I can't speak speak for others, only myself... These images are often a labor of my love of this sick...er I mean "hobby", in the event I ever make it to the winner'e circle (Har Har!) I'd like people to be able to see what was really in the original..


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Charlie HeinAdministrator
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 11/02/03

Loc: 26.06.08N, +80.23.08W
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: zerro1]
      #4852753 - 10/09/11 08:26 PM

So - just to make sure I'm getting the important bits covered, we are now talking about two possible rule changes.

The first consideration is to change the rules to allow an entrant to use a setup that they did not assemble themselves. Examples of this could be a family observatory, a remotely controlled observatory that is owned or co-owned by the entrant (specifically disallowing "pay for play" observatories like Slooh and Lightbuckets), a club observatory operated by a member, a setup operated by someone whose physical disabilities prevent them from assembling the equipment themselves but do not prevent them from operating the equipment - or whatever else might fit into this category.

The second consideration is the removal of the rule that disallows links to a "full size" or "full resolution" version of the entry.

If you are just now joining the conversation, thanks for stopping by. I'm looking forward to hearing your thoughts.

Charlie


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
rigel123
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 06/29/09

Loc: SW Ohio
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: zerro1]
      #4852757 - 10/09/11 08:29 PM

I'm all for including a link to larger sizes. I typically know pretty quickly which image I'm going to vote for just from the intitial post, but it would be nice when I'm not certain to take a look at each in a higher res format.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Charlie HeinAdministrator
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 11/02/03

Loc: 26.06.08N, +80.23.08W
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: SL63 AMG]
      #4852765 - 10/09/11 08:33 PM

Quote:

No matter what decision you arrive upon, one thing is for certain. Operating from a fixed observatory, whether remote or at your house, is a huge advantage over setting up a "portable" system, whether in your driveway, or at a remote dark site.

In my opinion, if there is any distinction in categories, it should be between permanent and portable imaging, rather than remote and local imaging.

Dave




Dave,

I was reading through the thread again just to keep things fresh in my mind, and this is a good enough point to repeat just so that we don't forget about it. Thanks for bringing it up.

Charlie


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Nebhunter
Carpal Tunnel


Reged: 10/04/03

Loc: Frostbite Falls
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: Charlie Hein]
      #4852828 - 10/09/11 09:06 PM

I've managed thru some connections to book some time on the 70" mirror. lol And I'm not kidding. Would that qualify as remote?

If you notice - or give a flying pickle - that the film guys rarely bother to enter the contest. If it's 35mm - it can fit the old guidelines. But to those who use the full potential of the medium and large format cameras it's just not worth the effort once you seen the compressed image. The new guidelines will help - but still not much help unless we crop out 60% of the image - or more.

I just do not understand why a link cannot be used to a webpage where the image can be displayed in hi rez and full size? Simple, and use CN to post the comments and thumbnail.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Charlie HeinAdministrator
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 11/02/03

Loc: 26.06.08N, +80.23.08W
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: Nebhunter]
      #4852857 - 10/09/11 09:19 PM

Quote:

I've managed thru some connections to book some time on the 70" mirror. lol And I'm not kidding. Would that qualify as remote?

If you notice - or give a flying pickle - that the film guys rarely bother to enter the contest. If it's 35mm - it can fit the old guidelines. But to those who use the full potential of the medium and large format cameras it's just not worth the effort once you seen the compressed image. The new guidelines will help - but still not much help unless we crop out 60% of the image - or more.

I just do not understand why a link cannot be used to a webpage where the image can be displayed in hi rez and full size? Simple, and use CN to post the comments and thumbnail.




I can't really remember why it was voted to specifically disallow links to the "full size" version of an image. This happened several years ago. If I had to speculate I'd say that the thought was that it would level the playing field a bit if everyone was constrained to the same dimensions. That's why I'd really like for those folks who raised the issue originally to chime in. It could be that they feel the same way and can remind me why it was important. It could be that it doesn't matter as much to them now. Could be that the prevailing view wants the rule changed (that's what I'm seeing right now). In any case, it would be good to hear from someone who disagrees with removing the rule restricting links to full size versions of entries.

For the record, I am keenly aware of the situation in Film Astrophotography. I'd like nothing better than to have more participation from you guys.

Charlie


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
ldesign1
professor emeritus
*****

Reged: 09/17/09

Loc: Northern Illinois
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: Charlie Hein]
      #4852947 - 10/09/11 10:10 PM

Quote:

No matter what decision you arrive upon, one thing is for certain. Operating from a fixed observatory, whether remote or at your house, is a huge advantage over setting up a "portable" system, whether in your driveway, or at a remote dark site.

In my opinion, if there is any distinction in categories, it should be between permanent and portable imaging, rather than remote and local imaging.

Dave




I don't think that the portable vs. fixed is a fair way to go either. I'm one of those few amateur astrophotographers that work 3rd shift six days a week, while most of you are out imaging. That leaves me Saturday to attempt a full night imaging session (weather permitting). We all know that an entire month can go buy without a clear weekend. Therefore, when I know that there will be a clear night, I rush home after work to catch the last hour or two, at most, before twilight, to do some imaging. That is why built a backyard observatory. Otherwise, the only hours I have to image during the week would be spent on setting up.

I consider myself to own a modest set of equipment which I have acquired over a 17 year period by trading up every so many years. Eventually I'll own dream equipment but until then, I make do with what I have. It's a slow climb up but I am learning a lot every day that passes. Every year, I review the previous years images and notice how much I've improved in both processing skills and imaging techniques. Though I'm not winning the contest every month, I always believe that I have an equal chance. Those of you who are really good, live under perfectly dark skies and enjoy exceptionally clear skies 6 days a week can only win three times before you are move up to higher level. Leaving the beginner contest to those who are still progressing.

So I think it's fair enough the way it is set up. I do like the idea of a larger file size limit. As far as link to a higher resolution image, I thought we've been doing that already. Am I missing something? "CLICKABLE LINK"

Quote:


3. Images to be considered for entry to the Challenge must be limited to a maximum of 100k in file size, a maximum of 800 pixels square. Entrants may elect to set this "entry image" up as a "clickable link" to a higher resolution image if they so desire, and entrants may also elect to instead provide a separate link to such an image if they so choose. If the entrant provides a legally sized and working "clickable link" as their "entry image", that "clickable link" will be included in the polling thread so that voters can examine the high resolution image before voting. However, any "entry images" displayed on the CN site that do not meet the file size and pixel dimension requirements stated above will subject the entry to disqualification. Any questions on this rule? Just ask.




Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Charlie HeinAdministrator
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 11/02/03

Loc: 26.06.08N, +80.23.08W
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: ldesign1]
      #4852956 - 10/09/11 10:16 PM

Hi Ralph. For the Challenges, links are allowed. For the site wide imaging/sketching contest, they're specifically forbidden by rule #7:

Quote:

7. In order to provide a level playing field, links to any other versions of contest entries are specifically restricted and will subject the entry to disqualification if included. It is the contestant's responsibility to ensure compliance with this restriction - although a moderator or administrator may alert a contestant to a possible problem in this area they are not bound to do so.




I definitely see your point about fixed vs. portable setups. It helps to see these things from different perspectives.

Charlie


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Bill Snyder
Pooh-Bah


Reged: 05/17/09

Loc: Pennsylvania. USA
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: Charlie Hein]
      #4858557 - 10/13/11 12:00 AM

I'm all in favor of raising the limit for the images to 200K
Also allowing link to a high rez image from the winners circle.

As for rule 9
I have to say a lot of people could be looking at a remote observatory option due to light pollution etc. Most remotes are owned by more that one individual, or have some kind of partnership involved. A remote site with good skies could produce more data than one person can process by themselves.
I'm all for adjustment of rule #9. I don't believe the pay for play should be allowed, I think you should still have to operate the equipment. A remote defiently has it's advantages,But when there is a problem... it's not in your backyard, it could be 3000 miles away:-)
Bill


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
lacomj
sage
*****

Reged: 09/06/09

Loc: Reno, NV
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: Bill Snyder]
      #4858967 - 10/13/11 10:26 AM

It seems that the issue of remote observatories is a bit complicated. Not all observatory operations are equal. Remoteness isn't the issue...the issue that we seem to be agreeing on is that the entrant should have a non-trivial amount of setup and operation of the observatory equipment.

If I buy into an existing co-op and don't have much to do with the assembly, maintenance and upkeep of a shared facility (just log in and use it), how is that any different than a Pay-for-Play service (which so far, there appears to be a consensus as being "too much")?

It seems that the criteria should be phrased in language that remote observatories are acceptable if the entrant plays a meaningful part in the maintenance/upkeep/operation of the equipment.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
zerro1
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 08/02/09

Loc: Smokey Point , 48.12°N 122.25...
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: lacomj]
      #4859050 - 10/13/11 11:17 AM

Quote:

remote observatories are acceptable if the entrant plays a meaningful part in the maintenance/upkeep/operation of the equipment




but there is always another consideration:

I feel that "physical limitations" must be thought of as an example of extenuating circumstance's.

I just think this needs to be kept in the dialog and be part of any rule changes...


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jared
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 10/11/05

Loc: Piedmont, California, U.S.
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: Charlie Hein]
      #4861080 - 10/14/11 03:35 PM

Glad that we have the rules change for the file size limit.

As far as rule #9, I don't see a problem with allowing remote observatories that were setup by a third party or a partner. Frankly, anyone with a remote observatory (either wholly or partially owned) is likely to already be competent to setup and polar align a scope, so they aren't really gaining a competitive advantage because a third party took care of this part of the process. If they aren't gaining an advantage from the fact that someone else did the setup, why restrict them? This would be true for someone with physical disabilities as well.

I would recommend we keep the requirement that the equipment be owned by the contestant, but would remove any restrictions regarding setup. Data should still be acquired and processed by one person. Rent a scopes and club scopes should continue to be prohibited.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Don66
member


Reged: 03/17/10

Loc: NC, USA
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: Jared]
      #4863885 - 10/16/11 10:06 AM

I'll jump in regarding the Rule #9 change. Due to injuries/disability from Iraq, I am not able to physically set up even my modest system. I have to have friends come over just to switch out OTAs. As the observatory becomes closer to reality, I will be doing none of the work on it. I will however be the one designing every part of it. Once a new (Goto) mount is acquired, someone else will be installing it on the pier, and turning the knobs as I direct for polar alignment. I have chosen not to participate in the contests due to this factor. It would be nice to be able to.

Regarding the file sizes and which version of the image is used for judging, I feel that the full-resolution image should be the one judged. I can absolutely hide a multitude of sins when I reduce to 800x800 px and 200k. Shoot, I do that on marginal images when a family member wants a print to make them look much better than what the image really holds...
My $.02


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
avdhoeven
sage


Reged: 05/27/10

Loc: netherlands
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: Don66]
      #4867667 - 10/18/11 12:16 PM

I would like to make a stand for larger images or linked images. For example I will never submit one of my solar images at this moment because when I reduce them to 800x800 they will loose all granulation, so it becomes a big white bal. I think that should not be the goal of this rule.... I understand the idea to make equal competition, but make than a limit of 2000x2000 and 500k or so, so that more is possible...

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Charlie HeinAdministrator
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 11/02/03

Loc: 26.06.08N, +80.23.08W
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: avdhoeven]
      #4871669 - 10/20/11 08:13 PM

Andre: Please have a look at the new site wide image posting policy. With this new technology in place, the end users themselves can now control the dimensions of the images they see on CN, so we no longer need to enforce a dimensional limit. You can go into your display preferences in "My Home" and remove any limitations in image dimensions or set your personal preference as you like.

However, we are still enforcing a 200 KB maximum file size limit (on a trial basis) for the reasons discussed in this earlier post. Because of these real usability issues it is pretty unlikely that we'll see a half megabyte limit on CN any time soon.

It bears noting that since the end user now gets to set the dimensions of the image they see (with a default of 800px on the longest axis), it may not matter what size your image is in actuality. Your entry could well be judged on the way it looks on the user's screen. This is another argument in favor of allowing links to "full size" versions of an entry. If links to "full size" versions are allowed in the contest then instead of the end user needing to go back into their display preferences to remove the scaling factor, they can simply click the link to launch a full sized version of the image that is not governed by the display preferences.

Charlie


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
lacomj
sage
*****

Reged: 09/06/09

Loc: Reno, NV
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: Charlie Hein]
      #4876414 - 10/23/11 06:50 PM

Food for thought...
Why is there a rule that says we must own the equipment we are using? What about those who use or borrow their club's equipment, or borrow a scope or camera from a friend (for example)? It seems that so many of the rules are arbitrary. What is the intent behind them? Are we trying to prevent entries from people who aren't "serious enough" to buy their own equipment (rhetorical)?

The more I think about this, the more I think most of the rules should be scrapped for the site-wide contest, and just let the best images win? The images should be both captured and processed by the entrant, but where the equipment is located, who owns it, or whether they rented time on a scope really seems far less relevant when we are actually looking for the best image site-wide.

Just a few thoughts.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
tjensen
Carpal Tunnel


Reged: 02/16/05

Loc: Chapel Hill, NC
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: rigel123]
      #4889915 - 10/31/11 08:41 AM

I don't like the idea of external links. Images to be judged should be the same dimensional size... upping the file size to 200 Kb is great though. 800x800 pixels is plenty big to judge. External links to show off the winner would be fine.

Definitely no pay by the hour online observatories. If the owner has been able to set up a remote observatory, then more power to him/her. I have a friend that has $65000 invested in astrophotography equipment. I don't have that kind of money. But it isn't the equipment... it's the skill you apply to it. I think the idea is to get the most out of what you have... and have fun doing it. If anything... subcatagories could be added... so the 2" Tasco isn't competing with the 16" RC.
Let's not get too caught up in the "competition side" Let's have fun, learn from each other, and enjoy each others work


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
PGW Steve
Pooh-Bah


Reged: 10/03/06

Loc: Winnipeg, Canada
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: Don66]
      #4907553 - 11/09/11 09:42 PM

Quote:

I'll jump in regarding the Rule #9 change. Due to injuries/disability from Iraq, I am not able to physically set up even my modest system. I have to have friends come over just to switch out OTAs. As the observatory becomes closer to reality, I will be doing none of the work on it. I will however be the one designing every part of it. Once a new (Goto) mount is acquired, someone else will be installing it on the pier, and turning the knobs as I direct for polar alignment. I have chosen not to participate in the contests due to this factor. It would be nice to be able to.





Thank you for your service I don't believe the rule should in any way prevent you from participating. I don't think there is an imager on here that wouldn't be honoured to come in second to you.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Charlie HeinAdministrator
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 11/02/03

Loc: 26.06.08N, +80.23.08W
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: PGW Steve]
      #4922270 - 11/18/11 09:17 AM

Okay folks, based on this discussion I think that it's time to put three rule changes to a vote...

  • Strike Rule number 7 altogether and allow links to "full size" versions of the entry in this contest.
  • Change Rule number 9 as follows: "You must be the owner or co-owner and sole operator of the equipment used to create the image/sketch. Doesn't matter what it is. 20" RC, ETX70, 2" Tasco or an 8" TMB. (ADD: Doesn't matter if the equipment is local to your location or remotely operated. No images from club owned equipment will be allowed.) No pay by the hour rent-a-scope images will be allowed."
  • Change Rule number 10 as follows:"Entries must represent the work of a single individual. You must (REMOVE: setup and) operate all equipment yourself, capture all exposures (or perform any sketching) yourself and process the resulting entry yourself."


At this point the floor is certainly open to further discussion. I'm particularly interested in tweaking the wording and nailing down the intent of these changes before putting each change to a vote. If you are just coming into the conversation, please take a moment to review the comments that have been made so far.

In order to move this along (for example, the discussion on the rule change on remote operation has been out there for a few months now and I would really like to have the revised rules in place for the December submissions) I'm going to close the window for additional comments on Monday, 11/21 and post the polls based on what we have then. The polls will run for three days (ending on 11/24 at midnight ET) in order to give us some time to hold a run-off poll in the event of a tie in one or more of the polls. If run off(s) are necessary, they will run from 11/25 until 11/28 at midnight ET.

Charlie


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jared
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 10/11/05

Loc: Piedmont, California, U.S.
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: Charlie Hein]
      #4922897 - 11/18/11 03:07 PM

I like it, Charlie. Takes care of situations where someone is physically not able to setup a scope. Allows people to present their work at its best (with the links). And allows remote observatories (for those lucky enough to have them).

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Charlie HeinAdministrator
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 11/02/03

Loc: 26.06.08N, +80.23.08W
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: Jared]
      #4923920 - 11/19/11 07:36 AM

I'm on board for most of the changes personally, but I'm not sure that I'm a fan of restricting images from club owned equipment. We allow folks who are "co owners" of equipment to submit images, this is in the rules already. This allows families and folks who are "co-op" owners of a remote observatory (under the rule change) to participate. You could make the case that a member in good standing of a club could be considered a "co owner" of the equipment the club owns. I'd certainly support that viewpoint as I don't see how it gives the club member an advantage over any of the other folks who would be considered "co owners" of the equipment they use.

Charlie


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Charlie HeinAdministrator
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 11/02/03

Loc: 26.06.08N, +80.23.08W
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: Charlie Hein]
      #4923929 - 11/19/11 07:46 AM

I just realized that with regard to rule #9, we have two changes to consider:

  • "Doesn't matter if the equipment is local to your location or remotely operated."
  • "No images from club owned equipment will be allowed."


These will be polled on separately. That makes a total of four "amendments" to the rules that we'll be addressing.

Charlie


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Charlie HeinAdministrator
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 11/02/03

Loc: 26.06.08N, +80.23.08W
Re: Imaging/Sketching Contest Discussion new [Re: Charlie Hein]
      #4933998 - 11/25/11 10:01 AM

Hi Folks,

The results of the four amendment polls are:

Remove Rule #7 (allow links to full resolution versions of entries)? - YES

Allow Remote Operation? - NO

Disallow Use of Club Owned Equipment? - YES

Remove requirement for contestant setup? - NO

I will modify the rules accordingly. Thank you so much for your consideration and participation.


Charlie


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | (show all)


Extra information
0 registered and 0 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  WOBentley 

Print Thread

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is disabled
      UBBCode is enabled


Thread views: 41453

Jump to

CN Forums Home




Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics
>