|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
ASTRO:Help me, Help you.
Web page says it all:
If you are a professional or amateur astronomer and you've ever had an image of the sky whose location or coordinates you did not know-or did not trust-then Astrometry.net is for you. Input an image and we'll give you back precise coordinates ("astrometry") for every pixel, plus lists of known objects falling inside the field of view. We have built this astrometry service to create correct, standards-compliant astrometric meta data for every useful astronomical image ever taken, past and future, in any state of archival disarray. We hope this will help organize, annotate and make searchable all the world's astronomical information. http://astrometry.net/ |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
ASTRO:Help me, Help you.
G wrote: Web page says it all: If you are a professional or amateur astronomer and you've ever had an image of the sky whose location or coordinates you did not know-or did not trust-then Astrometry.net is for you. Input an image and we'll give you back precise coordinates ("astrometry") for every pixel, plus lists of known objects falling inside the field of view. We have built this astrometry service to create correct, standards-compliant astrometric meta data for every useful astronomical image ever taken, past and future, in any state of archival disarray. We hope this will help organize, annotate and make searchable all the world's astronomical information. http://astrometry.net/ Considering all the major CCD software and telescope control software already has this ability I'm not sure what the point is. Even back in film days I kept precise records of the shot. I never found myself "Lost in Space." The imaging software I use, CCDSoft records all details of the shot. The location in the sky to a fraction of a second of arc, the exposure time, the telescope used, the CCD used, the filter used, the temperature of the camera's CCD and much more. The data is several pages long in fact. They seem to give only a fraction of what I already have available. Once I bring up the astrometry on the image I have the precise position and ID of everything in the image as well as its computed magnitude. If it is an asteroid I can get info on how fast it is moving. I plug the coordinates into the Minor Planet Center's webpage and get an ID of the asteroid. That's assuming it is a really minor one. The major ones, several hundred, are already identified on my screen and I can input the orbits of ALL the others if I wish to have a very cluttered screen. Ditto with comets. I use nothing special in the way of software that isn't used by any other serious imager. In fact, most have more than I do! Looking over the website their examples seem to identify only major objects. The shot of M100 showed dozens of galaxies but only three NGC galaxies were identified including M101. There were several other NGC galaxies in the image as well as dozens of fainter one. Why were not the rest identified? My software would have identified nearly all of them. Some appear to be anonymous and are cataloged only by position. That's not noted either. Maybe it is how it was set but if you are trying to convince me this is a service I need that sure doesn't come close. Rick -- Correct domain name is arvig and it is net not com. Prefix is correct. Third character is a zero rather than a capital "Oh". |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
ASTRO:Help me, Help you.
That's him told then!
"Rick Johnson" wrote in message ... G wrote: Web page says it all: If you are a professional or amateur astronomer and you've ever had an image of the sky whose location or coordinates you did not know-or did not trust-then Astrometry.net is for you. Input an image and we'll give you back precise coordinates ("astrometry") for every pixel, plus lists of known objects falling inside the field of view. We have built this astrometry service to create correct, standards-compliant astrometric meta data for every useful astronomical image ever taken, past and future, in any state of archival disarray. We hope this will help organize, annotate and make searchable all the world's astronomical information. http://astrometry.net/ Considering all the major CCD software and telescope control software already has this ability I'm not sure what the point is. Even back in film days I kept precise records of the shot. I never found myself "Lost in Space." The imaging software I use, CCDSoft records all details of the shot. The location in the sky to a fraction of a second of arc, the exposure time, the telescope used, the CCD used, the filter used, the temperature of the camera's CCD and much more. The data is several pages long in fact. They seem to give only a fraction of what I already have available. Once I bring up the astrometry on the image I have the precise position and ID of everything in the image as well as its computed magnitude. If it is an asteroid I can get info on how fast it is moving. I plug the coordinates into the Minor Planet Center's webpage and get an ID of the asteroid. That's assuming it is a really minor one. The major ones, several hundred, are already identified on my screen and I can input the orbits of ALL the others if I wish to have a very cluttered screen. Ditto with comets. I use nothing special in the way of software that isn't used by any other serious imager. In fact, most have more than I do! Looking over the website their examples seem to identify only major objects. The shot of M100 showed dozens of galaxies but only three NGC galaxies were identified including M101. There were several other NGC galaxies in the image as well as dozens of fainter one. Why were not the rest identified? My software would have identified nearly all of them. Some appear to be anonymous and are cataloged only by position. That's not noted either. Maybe it is how it was set but if you are trying to convince me this is a service I need that sure doesn't come close. Rick -- Correct domain name is arvig and it is net not com. Prefix is correct. Third character is a zero rather than a capital "Oh". |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
ASTRO:Help me, Help you.
Web page says it all:
If you are a professional or amateur astronomer and you've ever had an image of the sky whose location or coordinates you did not know-or did not trust-then Astrometry.net is for you. Input an image and we'll give you back precise coordinates ("astrometry") for every pixel, plus lists of known objects falling inside the field of view. We have built this astrometry service to create correct, standards-compliant astrometric meta data for every useful astronomical image ever taken, past and future, in any state of archival disarray. We hope this will help organize, annotate and make searchable all the world's astronomical information. Why post this? I mean, I can imagine you mention your site/program when it's finished ... but it isn't. Your program is still in beta testing? And I also question the use of it ... there is software around that all ready can do that. And besides this all: your service is also "taking the fun out of it". Isn't part (or for some a major part) of the fun in astro photography to discover yourself what you have captured? Menno |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
ASTRO:Help me, Help you.
TW wrote: That's him told then! The press releases I've seen for this site go on and on about how amateurs have no idea when where or what they took in there photos making them worthless to science and this site will add back that info. I found that very demeaning and very false. Every one of my frames has every bit of the "meta data" they say is missing and they will find for me. But my meta data (which is part of the image file) also has far more data than they say they will find for me as most of it is necessary to fully analyze the image yet can't be derived from just the picture file. It must be provided by the photographer, things like aperture, CCD used, filters used, exposure time etc. To tell me I don't know what the heck we're taking is very insulting to most all amateur astronomers. Then to tell me they can analyze the data with most of the needed data missing and do so better than I can with the data they don't have is just too much for my system to bear. I provide data for a major AGN researcher at McDonald Observatory. He's never found my meta data lacking. Yet its just the standard data CCDSoft or any other major imaging software for CCDs provides. Most professional astronomers recognize and often use the expertise of amateurs world wide, they don't demean them like the astronomer did in the press releases I saw did. But to imply they can get more science out of a basic JPEG image rather than the original FITS data taken by the amateur is hogwash. Now if the project was to collect and catalog all calibrated amateur FITS files (not the internet JPG image) for research that could be a very good thing. Combine that with a library of old film photos from all sources, then you'd have something worthwhile. But that's not what is being done as I read the press releases. The site is still in the beta stage and has little info as yet. Rick |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
ASTRO:Help me, Help you.
Why post this? I mean, I can imagine you mention your site/program when it's finished ... Um, it's not my website nor do I run or manage it. I was given this link by another AA guy. I just thought it would be interesting to help out. but it isn't. Your program is still in beta testing? Again not my website. Not my program. And I also question the use of it ... Ok. there is software around that all ready can do that. True: They are also always improving on the star maps and charts of the night sky. Other programs are being made or revised. Starry Night and others always updating and coming out with more and more... And besides this all: your service is also "taking the fun out of it". Isn't part (or for some a major part) of the fun in astro photography to discover yourself what you have captured? Taking the fun out of it? I don't understand this? If I was doing this, I would always be having fun, doing something I love to do... Menno Apparently, some of you think I run this website or program. No I don't. I was just showing this to anyone who would think this would be a good thing to help. But it has offended well 3 of you so far. I wasn't after offended you guys. Or be-littling you, ****ing on your cereal or what ever. To me when I read the website. I thought this would be a website to contribute. For anyone who might want to help out. Since we all here contribute in some way or another. Didn't think it was going to start a flame war... The "Help me, Help you" Phrase in the Subject header. Was taken from the Movie Jerry McGuire movie. Sorry if it looks like ME as myself. I just thought of that phrase when I wondered about what I should put in the Subject header. Just popped in my head... |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
ASTRO:Help me, Help you.
I wasn't chewing you out at all. You were just passing on the info you
had received. I don't "Kill the Messenger", or didn't realize that's how it sounded. I knew you had no connection with it. I'm truly sorry it sounded that way. I was just expressing my frustration at those who are pushing this as something it isn't. Or doesn't appear to be anyway. I've seen three press releases from them. Each told me, in a different way, I am too stupid to know what is in my own pictures. That I have no idea what a proper meta tag for a photo is and I am negligent for not saving this data. I found that all very insulting. I wrote back to explain this and was told again I didn't know what the heck I was doing and but they wanted to help me know what I was taking images of. That is, they sent me another form letter with the same crap in it. As I mentioned. If they want to be a storehouse for ALL usable astro photos taken by all astronomers, pro and serious amateur, world wide in a searchable database so a researcher could pop up an area of the sky that they're interested in and see it over a century of time that would be a super project that could turn up some interesting discoveries of transient events, such as Mc Neil's Nebula in past appearances, as well as errors in proper motion data and many other things like comet and asteroid recoveries. But to do it by telling amateur astronomers that they are too stupid to put the needed info in their photos and that they could somehow divine important things such as the type of CCD, telescope and filters used (needed to know the spectral response of the photo as well as compression distortions from NABG CCD's and do so from a JPG image full of artifacts and compression distortions of color and intensity, blows my mind. I didn't know they were psychic. Without that data the usefulness of such a large database would be compromised. But they don't seem to trust amateurs to know this and in fact tell us we don't. It gets worse when you look at what they say they want to do in the future. The releases all said they hope to be able to eventually analyze a photo to the point where they can tell where on the earth and when it was taken. Uh -- that's in my meta tag guys and with far more accuracy than you could ever hope to derive from studying a photo. I can see that useful for old photos found stashed in some University archive however. Still looking at the plate and emulsion used should narrow down things about as much as deriving proper motions from the plates which seems to be their idea. Finding several double stars and determining their brightness might be an even more accurate way as each will have a different period so would hit the exact same ratio of brightness only once every few decades in some cases. That could pin it down to the day. Yet that isn't mentioned, only using much less accurate proper motion is. It leaves me wondering how much thought went into this, very little it seems. The main thrust at their website (very different from the press releases I got) is that they'll tell beginners what's in their photos. That's fine though Aladin, an on line database run by SIMBAD has been doing that for years now and will tell you far more about what's in the photo than this outfit will, even leading you to all papers written on these objects. So if that's their intent they are reinventing the wheel and doing a far less complete job of it. Though I'll admit ALADIN isn't user friendly and takes some getting used to. Maybe they should write a better interface for ALADIN rather than reinvent it. Besides, as I mentioned, standard software used by imagers does the ID for you. And does a far more complete job. Or a visit to your local astronomy club will also get your beginner photos ID'd for you and no fancy computer system needed. My feeling is these guys invented a way to ID any starfield without first knowing the general area to look. This is new, I'll give them that! But now are looking for a use for it and this is the best they can come up with. They then give it a lot of spin, likely the same spin they gave getting the grant money to do this, and now are stuck with trying to find a use for it to get more grant money. Something very hard to come by! It could be useful in the case of old archived photos in which the location data has been lost. Thus my suggestion that this be an archive for photos of all era's to look for events that have been overlooked. But to tell me I am too ignorant or dumb to meta tag the data I take sure isn't the way to get me interested in helping the project! Rick G"Laptop" wrote: Jesus Christ Rick! Chill out, have a beer or glass of wine. Damn you having a bad night? Seem to have hit a button or something... Dude, I having nothing to do with this website. Contact these guys, Core Team Members of astrometry.badhorriblesoftwareguys.com Put your rant in an email to them... When I read the website over. I had a different idea of what this website was for... There's a couple of guys in my astro group who showed me this. Who want to help them out... I'll show your post to them. I haven't signed up yet. I was thinking about it. But I don't know now... (Began Heavy Sarcasm) PS: Can I have my butt back now? After you chewed me out... (End Heavy Sarcasm) |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
ASTRO:Help me, Help you.
On Sat, 24 Nov 2007 03:15:15 -0500, "G\"Laptop\""
wrote: Why post this? I mean, I can imagine you mention your site/program when it's finished ... Um, it's not my website nor do I run or manage it. I was given this link by another AA guy. I just thought it would be interesting to help out. but it isn't. Your program is still in beta testing? Again not my website. Not my program. And I also question the use of it ... Ok. there is software around that all ready can do that. True: They are also always improving on the star maps and charts of the night sky. Other programs are being made or revised. Starry Night and others always updating and coming out with more and more... And besides this all: your service is also "taking the fun out of it". Isn't part (or for some a major part) of the fun in astro photography to discover yourself what you have captured? Taking the fun out of it? I don't understand this? If I was doing this, I would always be having fun, doing something I love to do... Menno Apparently, some of you think I run this website or program. No I don't. I was just showing this to anyone who would think this would be a good thing to help. But it has offended well 3 of you so far. I wasn't after offended you guys. Or be-littling you, ****ing on your cereal or what ever. To me when I read the website. I thought this would be a website to contribute. For anyone who might want to help out. Since we all here contribute in some way or another. Didn't think it was going to start a flame war... The "Help me, Help you" Phrase in the Subject header. Was taken from the Movie Jerry McGuire movie. Sorry if it looks like ME as myself. I just thought of that phrase when I wondered about what I should put in the Subject header. Just popped in my head... I was going by the "We have built this astrometry service" part. -- This message has been brought to you by solar and wind power. Who needs the national grid? http://www.petersparrots.com http://www.insanevideoclips.com http://www.petersphotos.com A fella was saying to his friend, "My wife seems to have developed some sort of fixation that her collection of fur coats will be stolen. When I came home early one day last week, I found she'd hired someone to GUARD them! In fact, she stationed the poor guy right inside the closet!" |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
ASTRO:Help me, Help you.
Rick Johnson wrote: I wasn't chewing you out at all. Just everything he's doing. Give the guy a break. Your keyboard will last longer! You were just passing on the info you had received. I don't "Kill the Messenger", or didn't realize that's how it sounded. I knew you had no connection with it. I'm truly sorry it sounded that way. I was just expressing my frustration at those who are pushing this as something it isn't. Or doesn't appear to be anyway. I've seen three press releases from them. Each told me, in a different way, I am too stupid to know what is in my own pictures. That I have no idea what a proper meta tag for a photo is and I am negligent for not saving this data. I found that all very insulting. I wrote back to explain this and was told again I didn't know what the heck I was doing and but they wanted to help me know what I was taking images of. That is, they sent me another form letter with the same crap in it. As I mentioned. If they want to be a storehouse for ALL usable astro photos taken by all astronomers, pro and serious amateur, world wide in a searchable database so a researcher could pop up an area of the sky that they're interested in and see it over a century of time that would be a super project that could turn up some interesting discoveries of transient events, such as Mc Neil's Nebula in past appearances, as well as errors in proper motion data and many other things like comet and asteroid recoveries. But to do it by telling amateur astronomers that they are too stupid to put the needed info in their photos and that they could somehow divine important things such as the type of CCD, telescope and filters used (needed to know the spectral response of the photo as well as compression distortions from NABG CCD's and do so from a JPG image full of artifacts and compression distortions of color and intensity, blows my mind. I didn't know they were psychic. Without that data the usefulness of such a large database would be compromised. But they don't seem to trust amateurs to know this and in fact tell us we don't. It gets worse when you look at what they say they want to do in the future. The releases all said they hope to be able to eventually analyze a photo to the point where they can tell where on the earth and when it was taken. Uh -- that's in my meta tag guys and with far more accuracy than you could ever hope to derive from studying a photo. I can see that useful for old photos found stashed in some University archive however. Still looking at the plate and emulsion used should narrow down things about as much as deriving proper motions from the plates which seems to be their idea. Finding several double stars and determining their brightness might be an even more accurate way as each will have a different period so would hit the exact same ratio of brightness only once every few decades in some cases. That could pin it down to the day. Yet that isn't mentioned, only using much less accurate proper motion is. It leaves me wondering how much thought went into this, very little it seems. The main thrust at their website (very different from the press releases I got) is that they'll tell beginners what's in their photos. That's fine though Aladin, an on line database run by SIMBAD has been doing that for years now and will tell you far more about what's in the photo than this outfit will, even leading you to all papers written on these objects. So if that's their intent they are reinventing the wheel and doing a far less complete job of it. Though I'll admit ALADIN isn't user friendly and takes some getting used to. Maybe they should write a better interface for ALADIN rather than reinvent it. Besides, as I mentioned, standard software used by imagers does the ID for you. And does a far more complete job. Or a visit to your local astronomy club will also get your beginner photos ID'd for you and no fancy computer system needed. My feeling is these guys invented a way to ID any starfield without first knowing the general area to look. This is new, I'll give them that! But now are looking for a use for it and this is the best they can come up with. They then give it a lot of spin, likely the same spin they gave getting the grant money to do this, and now are stuck with trying to find a use for it to get more grant money. Something very hard to come by! It could be useful in the case of old archived photos in which the location data has been lost. Thus my suggestion that this be an archive for photos of all era's to look for events that have been overlooked. But to tell me I am too ignorant or dumb to meta tag the data I take sure isn't the way to get me interested in helping the project! Rick G"Laptop" wrote: Jesus Christ Rick! Chill out, have a beer or glass of wine. Damn you having a bad night? Seem to have hit a button or something... Dude, I having nothing to do with this website. Contact these guys, Core Team Members of astrometry.badhorriblesoftwareguys.com Put your rant in an email to them... When I read the website over. I had a different idea of what this website was for... There's a couple of guys in my astro group who showed me this. Who want to help them out... I'll show your post to them. I haven't signed up yet. I was thinking about it. But I don't know now... (Began Heavy Sarcasm) PS: Can I have my butt back now? After you chewed me out... (End Heavy Sarcasm) |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
[sci.astro,sci.astro.seti] Contents (Astronomy Frequently Asked Questions) (0/9) | [email protected] | Astronomy Misc | 0 | May 3rd 07 01:08 AM |
[sci.astro,sci.astro.seti] Contents (Astronomy Frequently Asked Questions) (0/9) | [email protected] | Astronomy Misc | 0 | April 12th 07 01:05 AM |
[sci.astro,sci.astro.seti] Contents (Astronomy Frequently Asked Questions) (0/9) | [email protected] | SETI | 0 | May 3rd 06 12:33 PM |
[sci.astro,sci.astro.seti] Contents (Astronomy Frequently Asked Questions) (0/9) | [email protected] | SETI | 0 | October 6th 05 02:34 AM |
[sci.astro,sci.astro.seti] Contents (Astronomy Frequently Asked Questions) (0/9) | [email protected] | Astronomy Misc | 0 | October 6th 05 02:34 AM |