Jump to content

  •  

CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.

Photo

Forum title or description suggestion

EAA
This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
139 replies to this topic

#1 Relativist

Relativist

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 8151
  • Joined: 11 Oct 2003

Posted 09 May 2015 - 10:26 AM

Who else thinks 'Optoelectronic Assisted Astronomy' would be a better name for this forum?


Edited by Relativist, 09 May 2015 - 03:38 PM.


#2 David B in NM

David B in NM

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1027
  • Joined: 05 Sep 2010

Posted 09 May 2015 - 10:35 AM

Curtis I don't believe the word opto is a good choice.  Stepper motors also fall under opto.

 

IMHO perhaps a simple tile like:  Near Real Time Viewing would be more appropriate. 

 

David B in NM



#3 ccs_hello

ccs_hello

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 10309
  • Joined: 03 Jul 2004

Posted 09 May 2015 - 10:42 AM

Can we consider morph some words in it, such as

photo-optical instruments (similar with SPIE's),

photonics (from IEEE),

photo-electron assisted,

etc.

 

Rationale:

Be it image-intensifier based, CCD or CMOS based,

they all incur photons get converted into electrons then somehow get acquired/amplified/processed/displayed.

 

 

For example:

 

Photonics-based NRT (near real time) Astro-Observation

 

Clear Skies!

 

ccs_hello



#4 Dragon Man

Dragon Man

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3382
  • Joined: 07 Mar 2006

Posted 09 May 2015 - 10:58 AM

Curtis, if I was interested in getting into Video Astronomy, NRTV, Electronic Observing, Near-Live, or how ever many other names it has been given by different people, I certainly wouldn't be looking for a section called 'Opto-Electronic'.

To be honest I wouldn't even know what that meant.  :p

 

I agree that the current name they have changed it to is too vague. 'Electronically Assisted Astronomy'.

Anything electronic that assists in Astronomy can be posted in here if people don't read the whole lengthy topic description. That's why we get the odd non-camera questions.

 

The Topic 'description' is also inaccurate.

Analogue cameras which many of us use are not Digital cameras as the description specifies.

Also, not everyone uses a Telescope. Many use camera Lenses. 

 

A Topic name is awkward because it needs to cover the type of Astronomy we do. It is 'Near-Live', and 'Electronic', and is 'Observing' and 'Recording', and the title also needs to be easily associated to 'Video Astronomy' which is what it is mostly called, for people looking for Near-Live/Video Astronomy.

 

Now, let the suggestions roll in  ;)



#5 budman1961

budman1961

    Apollo

  • ****-
  • Posts: 1334
  • Joined: 25 Feb 2011

Posted 09 May 2015 - 11:24 AM

Hum,

 

Curtis....nope, id rather it sits the way it is.
David....If a change had to be made, Near Real Time Viewing would be my choice.
Css....  I can't figure out what you are ever saying, so based on the fact that there is "engineer-speak" detected, I say no.

Ken....I agree 100%

 

Or we could try a couple of my creations:

 

DSLR's that since they have video mode, they can post anywhere they want cameras.

Any camera that uses software to give the "experience" of live video cameras.

Any camera that can be bought, made, reverse engineered, and an image produced forum.

 

Change for the sake of change is not good.  Opto-Electronic is just jibberjabber to further dilute & polarize the users in this forum, and take it further away from it's original mission and topic, IMHO.

 

Lets try this instead.....combine ALL the fora, Beginner Imaging, DSLR, CCD into one big fat category, and see how that goes, it would be basically the same as the OP's suggestion.

 

Or we could just call it Stargazerslounge.......ugh.

 

Andy


Edited by budman1961, 09 May 2015 - 11:27 AM.


#6 chasing photons

chasing photons

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 287
  • Joined: 19 Mar 2013

Posted 09 May 2015 - 11:30 AM

At the time of the last title name change, my vote was for…

 

Electronically Assisted Observing in Near Real Time

 

… and it still is because the description is very clear, it states the desires of the participants in the group and it covers all technologies to date.

 

The title looks long but it is the same length as the DSLR forum name.  And it could be called EAO for short.  I also prefer the word observing over the word viewing.


Edited by chasing photons, 09 May 2015 - 11:34 AM.


#7 Carl N

Carl N

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1561
  • Joined: 18 Mar 2012

Posted 09 May 2015 - 01:31 PM

NEV Astronomy.

Non-Eyepiece Viewing

#8 Relativist

Relativist

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 8151
  • Joined: 11 Oct 2003

Posted 09 May 2015 - 01:56 PM

So, now that we are thinking about it I have a question. Are we describing the activity, or the equipment used in the activity, or both?

 

P.S. It's my contention that optoelectronics it technically correct if we are describing the equipment used in the forum title.

 

http://en.wikipedia....Optoelectronics


Edited by Relativist, 09 May 2015 - 01:58 PM.


#9 budman1961

budman1961

    Apollo

  • ****-
  • Posts: 1334
  • Joined: 25 Feb 2011

Posted 09 May 2015 - 02:09 PM

This forum went through these machinations not too long ago, and it took a fair bit of time just to come up with the current title.

 

I think the ONLY person that is thinking about it is the OP, and for the life of me I can't figure out why.  IMHO, the category is already too diluted, and to many confusing.  Unless it was the OP's intent to increase the ambiguity of the current category .

 

Why don't we get back to the lively discussion, and quit trying to make a change, just for the sake of it.

 

I don't see the other fora flipping and flopping their names, leave it the way it is.   :bangbang:   :foreheadslap:   :gotpopcorn:

 

Andy


Edited by budman1961, 09 May 2015 - 02:10 PM.


#10 KarlL

KarlL

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1341
  • Joined: 14 Dec 2012

Posted 09 May 2015 - 02:32 PM

I vote for keeping it as it is now. However, Curtis certainly has an interesting point.

#11 Bob Arnold

Bob Arnold

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 16
  • Joined: 22 Jan 2014

Posted 09 May 2015 - 02:51 PM

Electronically assisted remote viewing



#12 Relativist

Relativist

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 8151
  • Joined: 11 Oct 2003

Posted 09 May 2015 - 03:32 PM

Andy I thought of posting this thread because we had another one of those OT threads due to mis-understanding of the title.

You will note that Opto-electronic is the technical description of every type of tech used in this forum, including CCD, CMOS & Photomultiplier type technologies. Also we use the display parts of these technologies - unlike Astrophotographers - for our viewing.

P.S. changed suggested forum name to 'Optoelectronic Assisted Astronomy'

I will further elaborate. First I don't think it's a huge problem that we get the occasional OT thread, I'm just thinking it's been about 2 years since we moved on from video only and the recent tripple OT post might signal a good time to reconsider now that the forum has legs. Second I think a modifier to electronic would help and there is an appropriate one since all of the tech we use and discuss involves optoelectronics one way or another. I'm sure we get the occasional person that is lost as to what EAA is, and OEAA will mainly serve to dissuade those that think it might have to do with anything electronic.

Edited by Relativist, 09 May 2015 - 03:58 PM.


#13 Relativist

Relativist

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 8151
  • Joined: 11 Oct 2003

Posted 09 May 2015 - 04:03 PM

Curtis I don't believe the word opto is a good choice. Stepper motors also fall under opto.

IMHO perhaps a simple tile like: Near Real Time Viewing would be more appropriate.

David B in NM


I do agree that encoders use optoelectronics, but the average person will probably not know that and I'm not as concerned about confusing the technically sophisticated individual because he or she will likely get it.

Your suggestion is an interesting one as it describes what we do more that what we use. I'm open to that type of description as well. Again, I do not think this is an urgent topic but simply relevant.

#14 Relativist

Relativist

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 8151
  • Joined: 11 Oct 2003

Posted 09 May 2015 - 04:12 PM

Can we consider morph some words in it, such as

photo-optical instruments (similar with SPIE's),

photonics (from IEEE),

photo-electron assisted,

etc.

 

Rationale:

Be it image-intensifier based, CCD or CMOS based,

they all incur photons get converted into electrons then somehow get acquired/amplified/processed/displayed.

 

 

For example:

 

Photonics-based NRT (near real time) Astro-Observation

 

Clear Skies!

 

ccs_hello

 

The reason I chose Optoelectronic for my suggestion is because it also encompass photoconductivity which is the principle used in CCDs in addition to the photoelectric effect.



#15 budman1961

budman1961

    Apollo

  • ****-
  • Posts: 1334
  • Joined: 25 Feb 2011

Posted 09 May 2015 - 05:10 PM

Curtis,

 

I won't belabor the point any further.  It was one poster, that cross-posted in 3 different fora.  I hardly think that qualifies this category as "having legs".  

 

The current setup seems to work, at least to me.  I just don't know why you want to make it sound so scientific, do you want newcomers to look at the proposed title, and fear the topics are way too technical, and over their heads?  Or intimidated to ask a basic, newbie type question?

 

Anyway, just my opinion.

 

Andy



#16 ccs_hello

ccs_hello

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 10309
  • Joined: 03 Jul 2004

Posted 09 May 2015 - 05:50 PM

Curtis,

 

Minor point:

CCD technology is based photoelectric effect (so does CMOS APS image sensors.)

The photo-conductivity technology.is like CdS type of light detectors, vidicon uses the same principle.

 

Clear Skies!

 

ccs_hello


Edited by ccs_hello, 09 May 2015 - 05:53 PM.


#17 Relativist

Relativist

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 8151
  • Joined: 11 Oct 2003

Posted 09 May 2015 - 06:14 PM

Curtis,

Minor point:
CCD technology is based photoelectric effect (so does CMOS APS image sensors.)
The photo-conductivity technology.is like CdS type of light detectors, vidicon uses the same principle.

Clear Skies!

ccs_hello


Here is a more in depth description.
http://en.m.wikipedi...otoconductivity

#18 lollywater

lollywater

    Sputnik

  • -----
  • Posts: 40
  • Joined: 10 Feb 2013

Posted 09 May 2015 - 06:14 PM

Video Astronomy

#19 Relativist

Relativist

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 8151
  • Joined: 11 Oct 2003

Posted 09 May 2015 - 06:20 PM

Curtis,

I won't belabor the point any further. It was one poster, that cross-posted in 3 different fora. I hardly think that qualifies this category as "having legs".

The current setup seems to work, at least to me. I just don't know why you want to make it sound so scientific, do you want newcomers to look at the proposed title, and fear the topics are way too technical, and over their heads? Or intimidated to ask a basic, newbie type question?

Anyway, just my opinion.

Andy

Andy I've spent a large chunk of time in my life posting literally thousands of posts and spent many many hours sharing and helping noobs at star parties over the years. Why would I want to confuse them more than they already are?

In addition I've already stated my motivation for this thread and stated I didn't think it was anything super important, just thought I'd bring it up. I've said that like 3 times already I think. No need to guess my intentions they are transparent.

In terms of what has legs, I'm saying that EAA has survived, if you recall there was a time we weren't sure the forum would make it. Sorry if I didn't word that statement clearly.

Edited by Relativist, 09 May 2015 - 06:23 PM.


#20 ccs_hello

ccs_hello

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 10309
  • Joined: 03 Jul 2004

Posted 09 May 2015 - 08:24 PM

For all, sorry a bit OT.

 

Curtis,

 

regarding that Wikipedia article...

   quote "the number of free electrons and electron holes increases and raises its electrical conductivity"

   That is not what happens in CCD and CMOS pixel's quantum well.

   Photo-electrons trapped there (view this as static charge), when charge is finally read out,

   it is the Q=CV that is how the voltage (proportional to charges) is read. 

 

 

BTW, CCD is the abbreviation of Charge Coupled Device.

Photoconductivity does have have a role here.

 

Clear Skies!

 

ccs_hello



#21 mattyk-usa

mattyk-usa

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 963
  • Joined: 27 Jan 2015

Posted 09 May 2015 - 08:49 PM

Seems to me it's about the utility in this case. The intent is to guide people to the subject of discussion, yes?  The details of "nearly live" or the technical logistics of how this media is captured serves to obfuscate rather than clarify for the new user.  Consideration must be given to the broader demographic, if the intent is to attract more to the hobby.  My .02 -  

 

1. Live video astronomy

2. Streaming astronomy

 

Explain the details after you have an audience.  Just sayin'.



#22 budman1961

budman1961

    Apollo

  • ****-
  • Posts: 1334
  • Joined: 25 Feb 2011

Posted 09 May 2015 - 08:53 PM

Yep, lets call it this....

 

.......... "the number of free electrons and electron holes increases and raises its electrical conductivity"
   That is not what happens in CCD and CMOS pixel's quantum well.
   Photo-electrons trapped there (view this as static charge), when charge is finally read out,
   it is the Q=CV that is how the voltage (proportional to charges) is read.

 

CRUSHED IT!

 

 

Andy


Edited by budman1961, 09 May 2015 - 08:59 PM.


#23 ccs_hello

ccs_hello

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 10309
  • Joined: 03 Jul 2004

Posted 09 May 2015 - 09:14 PM

Andy,

 

What's your point?

I've already stated OT.

If you don't like to see it, just ignore my post.

 

Clear Skies!

 

ccs_hello



#24 budman1961

budman1961

    Apollo

  • ****-
  • Posts: 1334
  • Joined: 25 Feb 2011

Posted 09 May 2015 - 09:19 PM

hmmm

 

No point intended, just a funny.

 

Andy



#25 mattyk-usa

mattyk-usa

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 963
  • Joined: 27 Jan 2015

Posted 09 May 2015 - 09:23 PM

FWIW, I got a nice chuckle out of it, Andy. :)




CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.


Recent Topics






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics