163 replies to this topic

[BrentKnight]

Regardless of your intentions, that was kind of offensive. You make generalities out of specifics and your own prejudices.

 

Smart telescopes...I hate that term. I prefer robotics or anything else. Anyway, smart telescopes are, in many cases a way for very intelligent people who probably have more knowledge than you to find an intro into EAA and astrophotography. Some of us were attracted to them because we specifically don't want to deal with the nonsense that most AP folks consider to be a rite of passage.

 

Why would I want to deal with archaic equatorial mount systems? I used them for decades and for the entire time, regarded them as a necessary evil. But now that evil is unnecessary. Do I miss setting up a system with a half-dozen or more components and fighting to get it aligned, focused, and ready to work? Oh yeah, I really miss that.

 

Do I go onto the AP forums here or anywhere else and act condescending and insulting to the members? (That was rhetorical so you don't need to answer.) This forum was created because the conventional AP folks were tired of the excitement and quantity of posts from the robot/smart telescope users. I bet they would love to hear your thoughts.

 

So, I will just say that if you have anything constructive to add to the discussion, I'd love to discuss it with you. 

I was not implying in any way that unintelligent folks were drawn to Smart Telescopes (or whatever they might be called).  You pretty much made my point though - you don't want to deal with all that extra stuff - all that extra stuff is taken care of in the device itself (the Smarts).  That's what a Smart Telescope seems to be (at least in its current form). 

 

I personally like that I can make my own choices, and I don't mind that extra stuff.  If I don't choose to use a Smart Telescope, then any Smarts that happen to make it into the rig are put there by me (based on the configurations I make and the devices I choose to build it with).  Above any other issues of cost or single vendor or whatever - I see this difference of approach as the main differentiator between DIY and ST.

 

I don't feel that Tarbat's DIY rig belongs here in the Smart Telescope forum, and I was trying to point out why (that is the title of this topic after all).  Different tools for different ways to do this hobby, and I agree that it's a benefit to CN to have a separate Smart Telescope forum.

[tarbat]

Can I just make one thing clear. I'm not some old astrophotographer. Until a year ago I'd only ever done visual astronomy. Albeit for over 50 years, but always visual through the eyepiece. So I wasn't even aware of this AP vs ST thing that you're all discussing here.

 

I'll shut up now, and continue to use my ASIAir-based Smart Telescope in exactly the same way as I use my Seestar and Dwarf II. Aside from the precise definition of "all-in-one", I'm clear in my own mind that I'm using a Smart Telescope, and I'm sorry if that offends anyone, that was never my intention.

[bradhaak]

I call them dumb telescopes, actually. Every other telescope I've ever used would work if I pointed it at the sky and looked through an eyepiece. These things (which I love) are dumb telescopes because they don't work without a tablet or phone or something similar.

 

But, I think that in five or eight years, they will be the standard telescope for most amateur astrophotography. I compare the evolution we're already seeing to the evolution of the PC but with a much faster evolution already apparent. Thirty years ago, the production PCs were mostly crap. They were closed, limited, and generally pretty bad. If you wanted to any serious work, you either bought components and built your own, or you bought a pre-configured custom PC from a shop that built them to order. By around 2010, most PCs were production. You could still build your own if you wanted to or had special needs, but for most users, it wasn't needed.

 

I think we are moving quickly to the point PCs have been at for the last fifteen years. 

[bradhaak]

Can I just make one thing clear. I'm not some old astrophotographer. Until a year ago I'd only ever done visual astronomy. Albeit for over 50 years, but always visual through the eyepiece. So I wasn't even aware of this AP vs ST thing that you're all discussing here.

 

I'll shut up now, and continue to use my ASIAir-based Smart Telescope in exactly the same way as I use my Seestar and Dwarf II. Aside from the precise definition of "all-in-one", I'm clear in my own mind that I'm using a Smart Telescope, and I'm sorry if that offends anyone, that was never my intention.

I'm not and never was offended. You brought up some interesting points and made me think to decide what I thought. Notice I don't say I'm right. that's not how opinions work. I tend to have strong opinions but am ready to turn on a dime when presented with new information.

 

Also, read my post above. I think the points we're discussing (arguing?) will blur in the not too distant future. IOW - I believe that what's true (or seems true) today will change in the not too distant future.

[GSBass]

I think your scope is smart, I also think it’s a robot…the line will continue to be blurred hopefully… I personally like the all in one appliance scopes, but there is a point of cost that would make me look at diy again if the convenance and capabilities were a match…. At what price point I would do that is probably north of 3 or 4k and I would probably prefer more choices than the asiair. But anyway, just chiming in my opinion, people who build robots from scratch are welcome in this forum by me… it helps me understand where the market is and where it’s headed…. But as always, you kinda need to see images straight from the scope….kinda common for the appliance bots, much more rare from the diy crowd so it can be hard to compare and easy to assume Vaonis and Orgin will provide the best unprocessed images….. I mean the bots process them but it’s still the result without doing anything that counts 

Can I just make one thing clear. I'm not some old astrophotographer. Until a year ago I'd only ever done visual astronomy. Albeit for over 50 years, but always visual through the eyepiece. So I wasn't even aware of this AP vs ST thing that you're all discussing here.

 

I'll shut up now, and continue to use my ASIAir-based Smart Telescope in exactly the same way as I use my Seestar and Dwarf II. Aside from the precise definition of "all-in-one", I'm clear in my own mind that I'm using a Smart Telescope, and I'm sorry if that offends anyone, that was never my intention.

[bradhaak]

I wouldn't say that it's a smart telescope based on the intent of this forum because there are other forums on this board where it's better matched, and that this forum was created specifically to keep us out of them. But I agree that the lines will continue to blur and eventually, the current architecture of 'conventional' AP rigs will go the way of the dinosaur, except for very specialized requirements.

 

Is it a smart telescope in general? Let's hammer out a definition that we all agree on and then the answer will be self-evident. Yeah, that's gonna happen. 

 

This is a community and I won't ever say anybody isn't welcome. It's not my decision anyway.

 

But I do get tired of the constant, "My telescope that I built is better because..." posts that seem to magically appear in every thread. They're repetitive and don't add any value to the conversation unless it's a request for purchasing info on different systems. In that case, informing people about the option to buy a bunch of hardware and software and then try to cable it into submission is completely valid. I don't think a lot of noobs (which we all were at some point) are aware of that choice. I'm also not sure how many would be interested in them once informed, but informing them is completely valid.

[Tivorocks]

I think the problem is with the term "Smart" used to describe all these all in one scopes.  My Vespera Passengers is no "smarter" than my Frac based DIY ASIair rig.  Likewise, my Passengers isn't any "smarter" than someone using a MiniPC based NINA and Sharpcap rig.  I use my Passengers and DIY rigs together on any given night.  The Passengers always gets set up first, push a button and off to the races.  Ten minutes later my all ZWO based DIY is ready to go.  At this point, operationally both systems are the same for the rest of the session until tear down.

 

Push a button and off to the races...is the difference.  That seems more "robotic" than "smart" to me.

[GSBass]

I’m in more of agreement than disagreement, it’s just that he built his rig specifically to try to mimic our smart scopes functionality, I find that useful… I don’t particularly find it better and I would not do it at this point but I often catch grief saying my vespera classic is the best thing since sliced bread  haha… and surprisingly get similar pushback with being impressed by the dwarf 3….. I must write in a too authoritative way or something …. Anyway point taken… we should all be a little less aggressive pushing the scopes we own

I wouldn't say that it's a smart telescope based on the intent of this forum because there are other forums on this board where it's better matched, and that this forum was created specifically to keep us out of them. But I agree that the lines will continue to blur and eventually, the current architecture of 'conventional' AP rigs will go the way of the dinosaur, except for very specialized requirements.

 

Is it a smart telescope in general? Let's hammer out a definition that we all agree on and then the answer will be self-evident. Yeah, that's gonna happen. 

 

This is a community and I won't ever say anybody isn't welcome. It's not my decision anyway.

 

But I do get tired of the constant, "My telescope that I built is better because..." posts that seem to magically appear in every thread. They're repetitive and don't add any value to the conversation unless it's a request for purchasing info on different systems. In that case, informing people about the option to buy a bunch of hardware and software and then try to cable it into submission is completely valid. I don't think a lot of noobs (which we all were at some point) are aware of that choice. I'm also not sure how many would be interested in them once informed, but informing them is completely valid.

[GSBass]

Again though.. you have to add internal processing to the equation… the image these things spit out at the stopping point is a demonstration of just how smart they are…. For example my vespera will present me with a very nice image… super smart, Dwarf3 can present you with a nice image if you manipulate curve functions while taking the image… that’s less smart but may change when they enable a.i. Vespera pro seems even dumber because the images are unusable without post… Origin seems super smart…. Not really sure where the asiair scopes would fall.. but my guess is it’s probably pretty dumb without user input

I think the problem is with the term "Smart" used to describe all these all in one scopes.  My Vespera Passengers is no "smarter" than my Frac based DIY ASIair rig.  Likewise, my Passengers isn't any "smarter" than someone using a MiniPC based NINA and Sharpcap rig.  I use my Passengers and DIY rigs together on any given night.  The Passengers always gets set up first, push a button and off to the races.  Ten minutes later my all ZWO based DIY is ready to go.  At this point, operationally both systems are the same for the rest of the session until tear down.

 

Push a button and off to the races...is the difference.  That seems more "robotic" than "smart" to me.

[BrentKnight]

I’m in more of agreement than disagreement, it’s just that he built his rig specifically to try to mimic our smart scopes functionality, I find that useful… I don’t particularly find it better and I would not do it at this point but I often catch grief saying my vespera classic is the best thing since sliced bread  haha… and surprisingly get similar pushback with being impressed by the dwarf 3….. I must write in a too authoritative way or something …. Anyway point taken… we should all be a little less aggressive pushing the scopes we own

I don't particularly care what one might use to do their astronomy and I make no judgement about DIY vs. ST as each have their benefits.  But... when someone can cobble together a DIY and call it a Smart Telescope just because it can be configured to capture data without user input - what is the difference?  Every AP rig can be called a Smart Telescope then, and then what's the point of having an ST forum? 

 

I was here when the forum was in the debate stage and I was also of the opinion that there really wasn't a need for a separate forum.  But since the forums' creation I can see the differentiation a bit more clearly.

[GSBass]

That is kind of my opinion though… if a diy system can be built that completely duplicates an appliance scope then there is no difference and as time goes on you would think all diy people would strive for that…. Whether or not I they are as good is up for debate… but most can’t even agree on which appliance scopes are the best … lots of brand loyalty seems to play a major part in people’s opinions… I try to be objective and currently think all of them have areas they are better or worse at… I think my vespera sucks on the moon for example, my dwarf was much better for that

I don't particularly care what one might use to do their astronomy and I make no judgement about DIY vs. ST as each have their benefits.  But... when someone can cobble together a DIY and call it a Smart Telescope just because it can be configured to capture data without user input - what is the difference?  Every AP rig can be called a Smart Telescope then, and then what's the point of having an ST forum? 

 

I was here when the forum was in the debate stage and I was also of the opinion that there really wasn't a need for a separate forum.  But since the forums' creation I can see the differentiation a bit more clearly.

Edited by GSBass, 18 September 2024 - 09:32 PM.

[BrentKnight]

That is kind of my opinion though… if a diy system can be built that completely duplicates an appliance scope then there is no difference and as time goes on you would think all diy people would strive for that…. Whether or not I they are as good is up for debate… but most can’t even agree on which appliance scopes are the best … lots of brand loyalty seems to play a major part in people’s opinions… I try to be objective and currently think all of them have areas they are better or worse at… I think my vespera sucks on the moon for example, my dwarf was much better for that

It's not that I don't want a rig that is easier to use, but I really don't want something that takes all the interaction out of an observing session for me.  The EAA I do is much closer to a visual experience than it is to an AP experience.  There currently isn't any ST's out there that can allow me the interaction I can get from Sharpcap during a live-session.  Adding that interactivity (and complexity) also does not seem to be a high priority for ST's manufacturers (or users from what I can tell) and so I'm in no hurry to strive toward more robotics...

 

This doesn't make what I do with my rigs better than what an ST might do, but it does make it different...

[GSBass]

True.. dwarf 3 will be the most interactive with its adjustable histogram functionality but nothing compared to sharpcap, I don’t really miss it though, I have a lifetime license but mostly use it for planetary and lunar capture with my mak since j got my vespera

It's not that I don't want a rig that is easier to use, but I really don't want something that takes all the interaction out of an observing session for me.  The EAA I do is much closer to a visual experience than it is to an AP experience.  There currently isn't any ST's out there that can allow me the interaction I can get from Sharpcap during a live-session.  Adding that interactivity (and complexity) also does not seem to be a high priority for ST's manufacturers (or users from what I can tell) and so I'm in no hurry to strive toward more robotics...

 

This doesn't make what I do with my rigs better than what an ST might do, but it does make it different...

[chrisecurtis]

I think there's a genuine distinction (or more accurately spectrum) in amateur astronomy (and other fields such as photography) between those for whom the hobby is mainly about the gear and the technicalities generally (e.g. processing) and those for whom the hobby is mainly about looking at and learning about "stuff in the sky".

 

The founder of Vaonis has often said he started because he was completely alienated by the "gear and technical" end of the hobby, and trying to take part in societies that were dominated by it, and wanted to find ways of pursuing his interest in "looking at stuff in the sky" and sharing those experiences with others. He thinks that interest, awe and wonder at the Universe is what drives people to want to "do astronomy" for themselves but that is often not what organised amateur astronomy is about.

[tarbat]

But as always, you kinda need to see images straight from the scope….kinda common for the appliance bots, much more rare from the diy crowd so it can be hard to compare and easy to assume Vaonis and Orgin will provide the best unprocessed images….. I mean the bots process them but it’s still the result without doing anything that counts 

I always try to list what processes I've put my ASIAir images through. I do take a minimal approach as I really don't like overprocessed images. Typical process on my Seestar and ASIAir images is what I consider the minimum, and apart from the Starnet bit is similar to the AI processing in a Celestron Origin.

1. GraXpert Background Extraction
2. Photometric Colour Calibration
3. Deconvolution
4. Starnet and cleanup the starmask if needed
5. GraXpert Noise Reduction
6. GHStretch
7. Colour Saturation
8. Star Recomposition

Last nights image, spoilt by fog and a full moon, so SQM was a terrible 18.52

 

Edited by tarbat, 19 September 2024 - 06:22 AM.

[tarbat]

There currently isn't any ST's out there that can allow me the interaction I can get from Sharpcap during a live-session.

 I'll sometimes use Sharpcap with my ASIAir-based Smart Telescope or even with my Seestar during a live session. This is a replay of last night on my ASIAir for example:

 

Edited by tarbat, 19 September 2024 - 07:32 AM.

[BrentKnight]

Again though.. you have to add internal processing to the equation… the image these things spit out at the stopping point is a demonstration of just how smart they are…. For example my vespera will present me with a very nice image… super smart, Dwarf3 can present you with a nice image if you manipulate curve functions while taking the image… that’s less smart but may change when they enable a.i. Vespera pro seems even dumber because the images are unusable without post… Origin seems super smart…. Not really sure where the asiair scopes would fall.. but my guess is it’s probably pretty dumb without user input

This is the big issue, I think.  It's a poor use of the word smart though.  There are some settings to choose going into a capture with an ST that will affect the output image.  During the capture though there is very little to do other than to watch and wait for the result.  Calling this smart and something that requires more user input dumb I think is missing the mark. 

 

Many of the tools available to use during the live-session with Sharpcap are very smart (they are well designed and do their job well).  But more than this is the choice of tools that are available.  Sharpcap is optimized for live-viewing and it allows manipulation of the stacked image on the fly (using real-time image processing tools very similar to what most do in post).  Examples of the tools provided include histogram stretches and color balance, but also filters to eliminate passing clouds, meteors and satellites and controls to adjust sharpening and background extraction.  These tools are used during the session to dramatically change the appearance of the view - to bring out details in the outer arms of a galaxy, or to then loose those details to bring out different details in the core.

 

The AI smarts in most current ST's can't let you change the capture settings to bring out details in very small but very bright planetary nebulae or allow you to get core stars in dense globular clusters.  Much of this could be done with post on the raw frames, but then that's a completely different experience than seeing it during the live-session.  I have no doubt that tools like these could be added to ST's, but I don't think most folks really want that - they don't want the extra hassle - or they are really only interested in a good picture at the end of the session. 

 

I bring this up not to say Sharpcap is better than an ST (although currently it is much better for live-viewing), but instead to point out that folks who go the ST route probably don't want this functionality and that someone who does want it isn't going to find it in an ST.  This is a fundamental difference, I think. 

[GSBass]

That’s fair… in an ideal world these robots would all have two modes of operation to satisfy both types of astronomers, I am putting a lot of emphasis though on how well the programmers optimize the image without post processing… it’s a good way to judge the sophistication of the system… there have been times where I could not beat Vaonis’ output on easy targets…. That’s a worthy goal of any bot maker…. But I can fully understand why some would not like that because it kinda does take you out of the equation… currently we share images with a little pride in what we have done in post…. Or in an eaa manipulation.

This is the big issue, I think.  It's a poor use of the word smart though.  There are some settings to choose going into a capture with an ST that will affect the output image.  During the capture though there is very little to do other than to watch and wait for the result.  Calling this smart and something that requires more user input dumb I think is missing the mark. 

 

Many of the tools available to use during the live-session with Sharpcap are very smart (they are well designed and do their job well).  But more than this is the choice of tools that are available.  Sharpcap is optimized for live-viewing and it allows manipulation of the stacked image on the fly (using real-time image processing tools very similar to what most do in post).  Examples of the tools provided include histogram stretches and color balance, but also filters to eliminate passing clouds, meteors and satellites and controls to adjust sharpening and background extraction.  These tools are used during the session to dramatically change the appearance of the view - to bring out details in the outer arms of a galaxy, or to then loose those details to bring out different details in the core.

 

The AI smarts in most current ST's can't let you change the capture settings to bring out details in very small but very bright planetary nebulae or allow you to get core stars in dense globular clusters.  Much of this could be done with post on the raw frames, but then that's a completely different experience than seeing it during the live-session.  I have no doubt that tools like these could be added to ST's, but I don't think most folks really want that - they don't want the extra hassle - or they are really only interested in a good picture at the end of the session. 

 

I bring this up not to say Sharpcap is better than an ST (although currently it is much better for live-viewing), but instead to point out that folks who go the ST route probably don't want this functionality and that someone who does want it isn't going to find it in an ST.  This is a fundamental difference, I think. 

[GSBass]

Just to add to that, when it gets to the point the robots do produce the best image you can get without post then that could get pretty boring in the forums with all targets pretty much looking the same from a given scope… I know we are a long ways from that but it’s probably going to happen eventually with a.i. advancements. I kinda had the same concerns with pixel insight, you can already tell when people use it and it’s plugins, photos still have individual flare but they are much closer to each other than they were not long ago

[GSBass]

Not really sure if it would be interesting to discuss one without the other and I certainly don’t want to enter other forums and invite the robot bashing that always seems to occur, at least here people are semi respectful of the equipment you own… most anyway, some people pop in here still to troll some

So much discussion on this Smart Telescopes forum is about post-processing, despite the forum description saying:

QUOTE: "The processing of final images ........... may be more appropriate in other Cloudy Nights forums."

[Psion]

If someone would like to replace a Celestron Original for similar performance at half the weight, and half the price, they have the option.

Attached Thumbnails

• 

Edited by Psion, 07 October 2024 - 11:50 AM.

[bradhaak]

Half the weight, half the price, and fewer features. More complex, much more work to set up, and not available in North America...

 

Yes, completely equivalent

[bradhaak]

And much more than half the price in the USA, even if I didn't have to pay import duties to get a telescope the SkyWatcher USA won't support..

[tarbat]

A quick comparison from last night imaging NGC7023 Iris Nebula with my setup and compared to my Seestar. All taken over the same time period of 178 minutes. My ASIAir-based FRA300 used 3 minute guided sub-exposures in EQ, and the Seestar used 20 second sub-exposures in Alt-Az.

• Top image is from my ASIAir-based 60mm telescope.
   
• Below are three images:
  - From my Seestar S50, stacked and processed in Siril+GraXpert
  - The original JPEG from the Seestar
  - My first image cropped and scaled to match the Seestar image

Edited by tarbat, 09 November 2024 - 07:22 AM.

[josjavpol]

I think ZWO is automating more and more of its dedicated cameras. The Duo includes 2 cameras, the tracking one and the deep space one. The Air adds built-in Wifi and I think it can be controlled from a mobile or tablet?

To start with Astrophotography, it has the Seestar S50 and has just launched the S30.

So I think that this tendency to automate will make the traditional AP with independent components possible with an all-in-one.

These all-in-one APs, call them what you want, more automated AP, smart telescope, for me it is just a name, an agreement of how we call things. How we call them is not the most important thing, but rather enjoying the results.

 

And I really think that Tarbat's results are very good! 

Edited by josjavpol, 09 November 2024 - 08:11 AM.