IOTD and Why It Needs Improvement

11.02 Bill Long - Dark Matters Astrophotography #... · view views · 1 like
andrea tasselli: Bill Long - Dark Matters Astrophotography: No disrepect to the imager, but having two tones of stars in that very large field (those being neon orange and neon blue) is not a trait nor an attribute of a great image. I couldn't agree more and that wouldn't be the first instance either. Right, the recent IOTDs taken by judges have suffered significantly as well. Piss poor stars, overly noise reduced backgrounds, star colors even being GREEN. Not pleased. This example here shows that the complaint I made in the OP -- that there is a significant bias over the subject matter of the images, is very very true. -Bill Like

11.02

Bill Long - Dark Matters Astrophotography

#...

· 1 like

andrea tasselli:
Bill Long - Dark Matters Astrophotography:
No disrepect to the imager, but having two tones of stars in that very large field (those being neon orange and neon blue) is not a trait nor an attribute of a great image.

I couldn't agree more and that wouldn't be the first instance either.

Right, the recent IOTDs taken by judges have suffered significantly as well. Piss poor stars, overly noise reduced backgrounds, star colors even being GREEN.

Not pleased. This example here shows that the complaint I made in the OP -- that there is a significant bias over the subject matter of the images, is very very true.

-Bill

11.02 Bill Long - Dark Matters Astrophotography #... · view views · 3 likes
Post removed by moderator on May 10th, 2024, at 9:08 AM UTC. Edited ... Like

Salvatore Iovene #... · view views · 5 likes
Chris White- Overcast Observatory: If I understand it correctly, there does not need to be any consensus among judges for the final pick right? It's just one judge that gets to decide? Maybe that is a part of the process that could be improved upon? Would requiring two or three judges to agree on the IOTD pick help this process? Agreed, this would be one improvement to add to my pipeline! A note @Bill Long - Dark Matters Astrophotography: if you don't want me to close this topic, please keep things civil and professional. Avod words like "piss poor", "terrible", and "trash". Like

Salvatore Iovene

#...

· 5 likes

Chris White- Overcast Observatory:
If I understand it correctly, there does not need to be any consensus among judges for the final pick right? It's just one judge that gets to decide? Maybe that is a part of the process that could be improved upon? Would requiring two or three judges to agree on the IOTD pick help this process?

Agreed, this would be one improvement to add to my pipeline!

A note @Bill Long - Dark Matters Astrophotography: if you don't want me to close this topic, please keep things civil and professional. Avod words like "piss poor", "terrible", and "trash".

11.02 Bill Long - Dark Matters Astrophotography #... · view views · 1 like
Salvatore Iovene: Chris White- Overcast Observatory: If I understand it correctly, there does not need to be any consensus among judges for the final pick right? It's just one judge that gets to decide? Maybe that is a part of the process that could be improved upon? Would requiring two or three judges to agree on the IOTD pick help this process? Agreed, this would be one improvement to add to my pipeline! A note @Bill Long - Dark Matters Astrophotography: if you don't want me to close this topic, please keep things civil and professional. Avod words like "piss poor", "terrible", and "trash". Sure, are there better terms you would like to see used to explain the bad shown here? I will be sure to use them. Those three terms are used to explain lunch in England by the way. ;) Edited ... Like

11.02

Bill Long - Dark Matters Astrophotography

#...

· 1 like

Salvatore Iovene:
Chris White- Overcast Observatory:
If I understand it correctly, there does not need to be any consensus among judges for the final pick right? It's just one judge that gets to decide? Maybe that is a part of the process that could be improved upon? Would requiring two or three judges to agree on the IOTD pick help this process?

Agreed, this would be one improvement to add to my pipeline!

A note @Bill Long - Dark Matters Astrophotography: if you don't want me to close this topic, please keep things civil and professional. Avod words like "piss poor", "terrible", and "trash".

Sure, are there better terms you would like to see used to explain the bad shown here? I will be sure to use them.

Those three terms are used to explain lunch in England by the way. ;)

Edited ...

11.99 Arun H #... · view views · 4 likes
While I would not have used the words that Bill used - the points raised by him are still valid, and the substance of his argument has merit. This is partly the reason why I suggested that the judges write a small paragraph explaining why they chose that image. And to be sure, there could be very good reasons. The quality of stars, clipping, and heavy NR are just some aspects and I don't know that we should get too hung up on them. The image could have been chosen because it is a great image of a technically very difficult subject. Sure, they could write a small comment. The only judge I have actually seen do this is Andy. Like

11.99

Arun H

#...

· 4 likes

While I would not have used the words that Bill used - the points raised by him are still valid, and the substance of his argument has merit.

This is partly the reason why I suggested that the judges write a small paragraph explaining why they chose that image. And to be sure, there could be very good reasons. The quality of stars, clipping, and heavy NR are just some aspects and I don't know that we should get too hung up on them. The image could have been chosen because it is a great image of a technically very difficult subject. Sure, they could write a small comment. The only judge I have actually seen do this is Andy.

11.02 Bill Long - Dark Matters Astrophotography #... · view views · 1 like
Are the shells here so fragmented that the words used are what you folks want to talk about, rather than the actual subject matter and its relevancy? Why are words so hard for people here to consume at their face value? Is this a shrine of Astronomy or a shrine of special snowflakes? Like

Salvatore Iovene #... · view views · 3 likes
Arun H: While I would not have used the words that Bill used - the points raised by him are still valid, and the substance of his argument has merit. Yes, I also agree with Bill's point this time, as a matter of fact. The thing is (and this part is for you, Bill) that it's not about the words, but the attitude. I loathe the antagonistic attitude, as if I wasn't actually the one with the best interest in making the IOTD/TP as good as it can be! But hey, it is a little about the words too: Bill Long - Dark Matters Astrophotography: Are the shells here so fragmented that the words used are what you folks want to talk about, rather than the actual subject matter and its relevancy? Why are words so hard for people here to consume at their face value? Is this a shrine of Astronomy or a shrine of special snowflakes? The Venn diagram of people using toxic language and demeanor, and the people going like "are you such a snowflake that you can't take it", is almost a circle. The sooner you will understand that you're engaging in toxic behavior, the better it will be for everybody, and the more credibility it will lend to your points. Didn't they teach you about catching more flies with honey than with vineger? Now to address Arun again: Arun H: This is partly the reason why I suggested that the judges write a small paragraph explaining why they chose that image. And to be sure, there could be very good reasons. The quality of stars, clipping, and heavy NR are just some aspects and I don't know that we should get too hung up on them. The image could have been chosen because it is a great image of a technically very difficult subject. I think this is bring this proposal in a new light. I think that initially it was phrased as a way to provide feedback (or maybe I misremember), but now I see it more of a way to make judges be more intentional in their selection. As a matter of fact, instead of a paragraph (which will be "Great work" 99% of the times) we could let the judges give values to certain parameters to explain why they chose this image for IOTD. Something like this: How much did the following aspects affect your choice? - Perceived quality of the data (1-10) - Processing (1-10) - Originality (1-10) - Composition (1-10) - Difficulty of imaging this object (1-10) Please write a small paragraph to explain your choice (optional) [_____________________] What do you think? And could you help me formulate the aspects above a bit better? I wrote this post a bit in a hurry. Thanks! EDIT: just to clarify: - The goal is to make judges more intentional, and avoid impulse decisions. - The goal is not to make the judges have to defend or justify their choices in order to address criticism. Judges are volunteers who do this for free. I don't want any toxicity directed to them. - The goal is not to direct potentially negative feedback towards photographers. That's why I framed the questions as "How much each aspect affected your decision" rather than "Rate this image 1-10 in these aspects" Edited ... Like

Salvatore Iovene

#...

· 3 likes

Arun H:
While I would not have used the words that Bill used - the points raised by him are still valid, and the substance of his argument has merit.

Yes, I also agree with Bill's point this time, as a matter of fact. The thing is (and this part is for you, Bill) that it's not about the words, but the attitude. I loathe the antagonistic attitude, as if I wasn't actually the one with the best interest in making the IOTD/TP as good as it can be!

But hey, it is a little about the words too:

Bill Long - Dark Matters Astrophotography:
Are the shells here so fragmented that the words used are what you folks want to talk about, rather than the actual subject matter and its relevancy?

Why are words so hard for people here to consume at their face value? Is this a shrine of Astronomy or a shrine of special snowflakes?

The Venn diagram of people using toxic language and demeanor, and the people going like "are you such a snowflake that you can't take it", is almost a circle. The sooner you will understand that you're engaging in toxic behavior, the better it will be for everybody, and the more credibility it will lend to your points.

Didn't they teach you about catching more flies with honey than with vineger?

Now to address Arun again:

Arun H:
This is partly the reason why I suggested that the judges write a small paragraph explaining why they chose that image. And to be sure, there could be very good reasons. The quality of stars, clipping, and heavy NR are just some aspects and I don't know that we should get too hung up on them. The image could have been chosen because it is a great image of a technically very difficult subject.

I think this is bring this proposal in a new light. I think that initially it was phrased as a way to provide feedback (or maybe I misremember), but now I see it more of a way to make judges be more intentional in their selection.

As a matter of fact, instead of a paragraph (which will be "Great work" 99% of the times) we could let the judges give values to certain parameters to explain why they chose this image for IOTD. Something like this:

How much did the following aspects affect your choice?
- Perceived quality of the data (1-10)
- Processing (1-10)
- Originality (1-10)
- Composition (1-10)
- Difficulty of imaging this object (1-10)

Please write a small paragraph to explain your choice (optional)
[_____________________]

What do you think? And could you help me formulate the aspects above a bit better? I wrote this post a bit in a hurry. Thanks!

EDIT: just to clarify:

- The goal is to make judges more intentional, and avoid impulse decisions.
- The goal is not to make the judges have to defend or justify their choices in order to address criticism. Judges are volunteers who do this for free. I don't want any toxicity directed to them.
- The goal is not to direct potentially negative feedback towards photographers. That's why I framed the questions as "How much each aspect affected your decision" rather than "Rate this image 1-10 in these aspects"

Edited ...

11.99 Arun H #... · view views
Salvatore Iovene: How much did the following aspects affect your choice? - Perceived quality of the data (1-10) - Processing (1-10) - Originality (1-10) - Composition (1-10) - Difficulty of imaging this object (1-10) Please write a small paragraph to explain your choice (optional) [_____________________] What do you think? And could you help me formulate the aspects above a bit better? I wrote this post a bit in a hurry. Thanks! Hi Sal, Yes, having the judges be more deliberate in their selections AND having that deliberate process made a bit more transparent was my thinking. I'd actually suggest the following, and use a three point scale (Very Much, Some, Not at all) -Technical attributes (Detail, Depth, Color) -Originality -Composition -Difficulty of Subject Using a three point scale instead of a 10 point scale avoids discussions of some sort of point system that all images are scored against and puts the focus much more on what positive aspect of that image caused the judge to advance it. In that sense, the IOTD is less about a scored competition, and more about exhibiting a selection of images that each exhibit some distinctive quality that the general community could appreciate and emulate. I do think a short paragraph would go a long way towards enhancing the IOTD. As an example, this image. Were I the judge to advance this image, I would have been thrilled to write a paragraph similar to the following: "What is striking about this image is not its technical quality but its composition and the message it communicates. The lines of the stairs, the viewing platform, and the pathway to the ocean, all lead to the beautifully captured arc of the Milky Way and the meteor shower. The placement of the girl and her expression perfectly captures the sense of wonder and awe we as humans have felt for the night sky. It is as much poetry as it is an image." Something like this shows the thinking of the judge and does not leave us guessing as to whether they ignored the flaws in an image. Yes, the image may have had flaws, but what was good about it made it worth advancing. And it does not mean it was "better" than 20 other images. Just that there was something about this one that this judge at this point felt was worth sharing with the community. Like

11.99

Arun H

#...

Salvatore Iovene:
How much did the following aspects affect your choice?
- Perceived quality of the data (1-10)
- Processing (1-10)
- Originality (1-10)
- Composition (1-10)
- Difficulty of imaging this object (1-10)

Please write a small paragraph to explain your choice (optional)
[_____________________]

What do you think? And could you help me formulate the aspects above a bit better? I wrote this post a bit in a hurry. Thanks!

Hi Sal,

Yes, having the judges be more deliberate in their selections AND having that deliberate process made a bit more transparent was my thinking. I'd actually suggest the following, and use a three point scale (Very Much, Some, Not at all)

-Technical attributes (Detail, Depth, Color)
-Originality
-Composition
-Difficulty of Subject

Using a three point scale instead of a 10 point scale avoids discussions of some sort of point system that all images are scored against and puts the focus much more on what positive aspect of that image caused the judge to advance it. In that sense, the IOTD is less about a scored competition, and more about exhibiting a selection of images that each exhibit some distinctive quality that the general community could appreciate and emulate.

I do think a short paragraph would go a long way towards enhancing the IOTD. As an example, this image. Were I the judge to advance this image, I would have been thrilled to write a paragraph similar to the following:

"What is striking about this image is not its technical quality but its composition and the message it communicates. The lines of the stairs, the viewing platform, and the pathway to the ocean, all lead to the beautifully captured arc of the Milky Way and the meteor shower. The placement of the girl and her expression perfectly captures the sense of wonder and awe we as humans have felt for the night sky. It is as much poetry as it is an image."

Something like this shows the thinking of the judge and does not leave us guessing as to whether they ignored the flaws in an image. Yes, the image may have had flaws, but what was good about it made it worth advancing. And it does not mean it was "better" than 20 other images. Just that there was something about this one that this judge at this point felt was worth sharing with the community.

13.12 Jeffbax Velocicaptor #... · view views · 9 likes
Bill Long - Dark Matters Astrophotography: Post removed by moderator on May 10th, 2024, at 9:08 AM UTC. Dear Bill, the 2nd image you take as a 🤬 example is one of mine. If you don't understand why 13 submitters, 3 reviewers and finally a judge chose this image, I invite you to look at this link to understand what it is about. https://astrob.in/kab5g1/B/ I also invite you to look for over images of this object, everywhere. And maybe you will understand. Maybe not, it's not serious. You are hurting yourself. Instead of explaining with aggressive words why other people's images don't deserve IOTDs, try asking, kindly, how you could improve yours to get one CS JF Edited ... Like

13.12

Jeffbax Velocicaptor

#...

· 9 likes

Bill Long - Dark Matters Astrophotography:
Post removed by moderator on May 10th, 2024, at 9:08 AM UTC.

Dear Bill, the 2nd image you take as a 🤬 example is one of mine. If you don't understand why 13 submitters, 3 reviewers and finally a judge chose this image, I invite you to look at this link to understand what it is about.

https://astrob.in/kab5g1/B/

I also invite you to look for over images of this object, everywhere. And maybe you will understand. Maybe not, it's not serious.

You are hurting yourself.

Instead of explaining with aggressive words why other people's images don't deserve IOTDs, try asking, kindly, how you could improve yours to get one

CS

JF

Edited ...

AdrianC. #... · view views · 6 likes
@Bill Long - Dark Matters Astrophotography No use in getting so worked up over this IOTD thing Bill. There are thousands of pics for common objects, hardly anyone can make a "better one". People have fun making their own version. Why they need to compete when clearly the more expensive gear you have the better the picture and easier the process, is beyond me. This produces a strong bias towards expensive gear and skews the statistic. Let's say I submit a picture to IOTD and win, with my gear, that consists of 10M mount, 8 inch apo etc. (Perhaps around $ 40K worth?). What does wining mean? Getting the data is very easy, I sleep during the night... The subs are good given very good optics and tracking ... Processing with tools like wbpp, AI BXT, NXT is easy .... So what is the IOTD rewarding me for? If it where up to me I would reward the average Joe in a backyard with an EQ6 and an SCT because I know that guy has to sit all night tinkering and all day or days processing to get a good image. Like

AdrianC.

#...

· 6 likes

@Bill Long - Dark Matters Astrophotography
No use in getting so worked up over this IOTD thing Bill. There are thousands of pics for common objects, hardly anyone can make a "better one". People have fun making their own version.

Why they need to compete when clearly the more expensive gear you have the better the picture and easier the process, is beyond me. This produces a strong bias towards expensive gear and skews the statistic.

Let's say I submit a picture to IOTD and win, with my gear, that consists of 10M mount, 8 inch apo etc. (Perhaps around $ 40K worth?).
What does wining mean? Getting the data is very easy, I sleep during the night...
The subs are good given very good optics and tracking ...
Processing with tools like wbpp, AI BXT, NXT is easy ....
So what is the IOTD rewarding me for?

If it where up to me I would reward the average Joe in a backyard with an EQ6 and an SCT because I know that guy has to sit all night tinkering and all day or days processing to get a good image.

AdrianC. #... · view views · 2 likes
Jeffbax Velocicaptor: Bill Long - Dark Matters Astrophotography: Post removed by moderator on May 10th, 2024, at 9:08 AM UTC. dear bill, the 2nd image you take as a 🤬 example is one of mine. If you don't understand why 13 submitters, 3 reviewers and finally a judge chose this image, I invite you to look at this link to understand what it is about. https://astrob.in/kab5g1/B/ I also invite you to look for over images of this object, everywhere. and maybe you will understand. maybe not. it's not serious. You are hurting yourself. Instead of explaining with aggressive words why other people's images don't deserve IOTDs, try asking, kindly, how you could improove yours to get one CS JF I don't get it either. It was taken with a 1 meter telescope. How is that backyard amateur astronomy? Edited ... Like

AdrianC.

#...

· 2 likes

Jeffbax Velocicaptor:
Bill Long - Dark Matters Astrophotography:
Post removed by moderator on May 10th, 2024, at 9:08 AM UTC.

dear bill, the 2nd image you take as a 🤬 example is one of mine. If you don't understand why 13 submitters, 3 reviewers and finally a judge chose this image, I invite you to look at this link to understand what it is about.

https://astrob.in/kab5g1/B/

I also invite you to look for over images of this object, everywhere. and maybe you will understand. maybe not. it's not serious.

You are hurting yourself.

Instead of explaining with aggressive words why other people's images don't deserve IOTDs, try asking, kindly, how you could improove yours to get one

CS

JF

I don't get it either. It was taken with a 1 meter telescope. How is that backyard amateur astronomy?

Edited ...

11.99 Arun H #... · view views
AdrianC.: I don't get it either. It was taken with a 1 meter telescope. How is that backyard amateur astronomy? The definition of what constitutes "amateur astronomy" has radically changed. There are people who invest $200-$300K in remote setups, and there are people who do this in their backyards using $4K in equipment (or less). I think there is still a place for highlighting special images in a constructive and transparent manner, while not viewing this as a contest which rewards increasing investment - something that sends, IMO, a really bad message to the community. That was the motivation behind some of the suggestions made here, such as multiple judges voting on an image, asking the judges to be more transparent in their selections, etc.. But if we spend time attacking each other and raising the emotional temperature versus constructive discussion (note: general comment, not directed at Adrian), then we will not make any meaningful changes. Like

11.99

Arun H

#...

AdrianC.:
I don't get it either. It was taken with a 1 meter telescope. How is that backyard amateur astronomy?

The definition of what constitutes "amateur astronomy" has radically changed. There are people who invest $200-$300K in remote setups, and there are people who do this in their backyards using $4K in equipment (or less). I think there is still a place for highlighting special images in a constructive and transparent manner, while not viewing this as a contest which rewards increasing investment - something that sends, IMO, a really bad message to the community. That was the motivation behind some of the suggestions made here, such as multiple judges voting on an image, asking the judges to be more transparent in their selections, etc..

But if we spend time attacking each other and raising the emotional temperature versus constructive discussion (note: general comment, not directed at Adrian), then we will not make any meaningful changes.

AdrianC. #... · view views · 1 like
Arun H: AdrianC.: I don't get it either. It was taken with a 1 meter telescope. How is that backyard amateur astronomy? The definition of what constitutes "amateur astronomy" has radically changed. There are people who invest $200-$300K in remote setups, and there are people who do this in their backyards using $4K in equipment (or less). I think there is still a place for highlighting special images in a constructive and transparent manner, while not viewing this as a contest which rewards increasing investment - something that sends, IMO, a really bad message to the community. That was the motivation behind some of the suggestions made here, such as multiple judges voting on an image, asking the judges to be more transparent in their selections, etc.. But if we spend time attacking each other and raising the emotional temperature versus constructive discussion (note: general comment, not directed at Adrian), then we will not make any meaningful changes. Inherently a $200K system at a remote site will produce exceptional images with great ease and great yield. It's basically effort less. Mixing those images with a big pool that contains various equipment will skew the statistics, and to put it simply it's not fair. As I stated earlier I would rather award an average Joe that puts a significant effort and dedication into making the image, even if its not as exceptional as the $200k image. What would be fair is to have the guy with the 200K gear compete with another guy that has 200k gear, to even things out. Then the quality of the image will be dictated by processing skills ... may the best processor win You might say that there are more average amateurs, but the yield is more important. At a remote site you could yield tens? hundreds? of images per year, while the backyard astro Joe might yield 3/year. Again you have more chances with expensive gear and remote. Maybe categories like IOTD HighEnd gear, IOTD Average gear would be a good start, if people care so much about this. Maybe like this more average amateurs would have their effort rewarded. It would be interesting to make statistics, it would answer lots of questions in a pragmatic way. Edited ... Like

AdrianC.

#...

· 1 like

Arun H:
AdrianC.:
I don't get it either. It was taken with a 1 meter telescope. How is that backyard amateur astronomy?

The definition of what constitutes "amateur astronomy" has radically changed. There are people who invest $200-$300K in remote setups, and there are people who do this in their backyards using $4K in equipment (or less). I think there is still a place for highlighting special images in a constructive and transparent manner, while not viewing this as a contest which rewards increasing investment - something that sends, IMO, a really bad message to the community. That was the motivation behind some of the suggestions made here, such as multiple judges voting on an image, asking the judges to be more transparent in their selections, etc..

But if we spend time attacking each other and raising the emotional temperature versus constructive discussion (note: general comment, not directed at Adrian), then we will not make any meaningful changes.

Inherently a $200K system at a remote site will produce exceptional images with great ease and great yield. It's basically effort less. Mixing those images with a big pool that contains various equipment will skew the statistics, and to put it simply it's not fair.

As I stated earlier I would rather award an average Joe that puts a significant effort and dedication into making the image, even if its not as exceptional as the $200k image.

What would be fair is to have the guy with the 200K gear compete with another guy that has 200k gear, to even things out. Then the quality of the image will be dictated by processing skills ... may the best processor win

You might say that there are more average amateurs, but the yield is more important. At a remote site you could yield tens? hundreds? of images per year, while the backyard astro Joe might yield 3/year. Again you have more chances with expensive gear and remote.

Maybe categories like IOTD HighEnd gear, IOTD Average gear would be a good start, if people care so much about this. Maybe like this more average amateurs would have their effort rewarded.

It would be interesting to make statistics, it would answer lots of questions in a pragmatic way.

Edited ...

1.51 Tommy Mastro #... · view views · 3 likes
I can't believe this thread is still going. Certain judges will never listen to reason and will never be open to any of these excellent and extremely reasonable suggestions. I hate to sound pessimistic, but this thread has made me so jaded to the Astrobin IOTD. Hopefully the OP and all the supporters of change will eventually win out. Astrobin is a great place but can be sooo much better! Like

Salvatore Iovene #... · view views · 5 likes
Tommy Mastro: I can't believe this thread is still going. Certain judges will never listen to reason and will never be open to any of these excellent and extremely reasonable suggestions. I hate to sound pessimistic, but this thread has made me so jaded to the Astrobin IOTD. Hopefully the OP and all the supporters of change will eventually win out. Astrobin is a great place but can be sooo much better! There are literally 4 action points that have taken, am taking, or plan to take as a direct result of this thread: - added more slots and reviewers: we’re now getting 2x as many top picks as before this thread - I started counting Reviewer views too, to determine if I need to add an auto-resubmit mechanism for reviewer too if an image doesn’t get enough view - I plan to implement the mechanism to make the judges choice more deliberate as proposed by Arun (short to middle term) - I plan to add a multiple vote mechanism at the judges level too (longer term as this is far more complicated) Suggestions about splitting the IOTD/TP into categories will still be met with rejection. There is no way to do this fairly. Splitting by cost of equipment is the closest you get to fair, until people start complaining that so and so has more free time because they don’t work, or don’t have kids, or so and so actually didn’t earn their equipment because they did t work as hard as me to afford it, or they live in a place with better sky and so on. See the IOTD FAQ. Thanks! Like

Salvatore Iovene

#...

· 5 likes

Tommy Mastro:
I can't believe this thread is still going. Certain judges will never listen to reason and will never be open to any of these excellent and extremely reasonable suggestions. I hate to sound pessimistic, but this thread has made me so jaded to the Astrobin IOTD. Hopefully the OP and all the supporters of change will eventually win out. Astrobin is a great place but can be sooo much better!

There are literally 4 action points that have taken, am taking, or plan to take as a direct result of this thread:

- added more slots and reviewers: we’re now getting 2x as many top picks as before this thread
- I started counting Reviewer views too, to determine if I need to add an auto-resubmit mechanism for reviewer too if an image doesn’t get enough view
- I plan to implement the mechanism to make the judges choice more deliberate as proposed by Arun (short to middle term)
- I plan to add a multiple vote mechanism at the judges level too (longer term as this is far more complicated)

Suggestions about splitting the IOTD/TP into categories will still be met with rejection. There is no way to do this fairly. Splitting by cost of equipment is the closest you get to fair, until people start complaining that so and so has more free time because they don’t work, or don’t have kids, or so and so actually didn’t earn their equipment because they did t work as hard as me to afford it, or they live in a place with better sky and so on. See the IOTD FAQ.

Thanks!

7.67 SemiPro #... · view views · 6 likes
Some people will never be happy and I find astro to be chalk full of a disproportionate amount of "my way or the highway" type of people and it really shows here. Oh the IotD was not processed exactly how I would of processed it? Clearly its trash. Oh, the IotD process does not function how I want it to function? Must be trash. Judges didn't pick images that I would of personally picked? They must be trash. Some people need to grow up. Salvatore Iovene: - added more slots and reviewers: we’re now getting 2x as many top picks as before this thread - I started counting Reviewer views too, to determine if I need to add an auto-resubmit mechanism for reviewer too if an image doesn’t get enough view - I plan to implement the mechanism to make the judges choice more deliberate as proposed by Arun (short to middle term) - I plan to add a multiple vote mechanism at the judges level too (longer term as this is far more complicated) I mean... look what we got out of this thread. Granted, the first one was already on the burner to begin with, but come on folks. Those who expressed a desire for change won out. Like

7.67

SemiPro

#...

· 6 likes

Some people will never be happy and I find astro to be chalk full of a disproportionate amount of "my way or the highway" type of people and it really shows here. Oh the IotD was not processed exactly how I would of processed it? Clearly its trash. Oh, the IotD process does not function how I want it to function? Must be trash. Judges didn't pick images that I would of personally picked? They must be trash. Some people need to grow up.

Salvatore Iovene:
- added more slots and reviewers: we’re now getting 2x as many top picks as before this thread
- I started counting Reviewer views too, to determine if I need to add an auto-resubmit mechanism for reviewer too if an image doesn’t get enough view
- I plan to implement the mechanism to make the judges choice more deliberate as proposed by Arun (short to middle term)
- I plan to add a multiple vote mechanism at the judges level too (longer term as this is far more complicated)

I mean... look what we got out of this thread. Granted, the first one was already on the burner to begin with, but come on folks. Those who expressed a desire for change won out.

Salvatore Iovene #... · view views · 4 likes
Some people will never be happy It's also a matter of numbers. There are 365 IOTDs per year, and I think that we can all agree that there is PLENTY of subjectivity involved in selecting an IOTD. After all it's not only a matter of pure technique: there are subjective factors involved. Astrophotography, in my opinion, is the marriage or art, science and engineering. Now for each of the 365 images, I'm sure that for each one there would be a 0.1% of people (at least) who hates it. If 1000 people see the IOTD every day, every day there will be one person who thinks the process is a disgrace because this particular IOTD did not please them. This means that even if the IOTD/TP process had an approval rate of 99.9%, there would be hundreds of people every year who feel jaded, disillusioned and disappointed by it. My goal is to strive to get that approval rate as high as possible, but I also recognize that it's LITERALLY impossible to make 100% of you 100% happy 100% of the times, and this is just something that we have to accept, as I have. Nonetheless, people who express their opinions are very welcome, tho my skin is not quite thick enough to cope with some people who email me privately to shit all over my hard work (and the IOTD/TP staff work) of 13 years. But I'm working on it :-) Like

Salvatore Iovene

#...

· 4 likes

Some people will never be happy

It's also a matter of numbers. There are 365 IOTDs per year, and I think that we can all agree that there is PLENTY of subjectivity involved in selecting an IOTD. After all it's not only a matter of pure technique: there are subjective factors involved. Astrophotography, in my opinion, is the marriage or art, science and engineering.

Now for each of the 365 images, I'm sure that for each one there would be a 0.1% of people (at least) who hates it.

If 1000 people see the IOTD every day, every day there will be one person who thinks the process is a disgrace because this particular IOTD did not please them.

This means that even if the IOTD/TP process had an approval rate of 99.9%, there would be hundreds of people every year who feel jaded, disillusioned and disappointed by it.

My goal is to strive to get that approval rate as high as possible, but I also recognize that it's LITERALLY impossible to make 100% of you 100% happy 100% of the times, and this is just something that we have to accept, as I have.

Nonetheless, people who express their opinions are very welcome, tho my skin is not quite thick enough to cope with some people who email me privately to shit all over my hard work (and the IOTD/TP staff work) of 13 years. But I'm working on it :-)

AdrianC. #... · view views · 1 like
Salvatore Iovene: Some people will never be happy It's also a matter of numbers. There are 365 IOTDs per year, and I think that we can all agree that there is PLENTY of subjectivity involved in selecting an IOTD. After all it's not only a matter of pure technique: there are subjective factors involved. Astrophotography, in my opinion, is the marriage or art, science and engineering. Now for each of the 365 images, I'm sure that for each one there would be a 0.1% of people (at least) who hates it. If 1000 people see the IOTD every day, every day there will be one person who thinks the process is a disgrace because this particular IOTD did not please them. This means that even if the IOTD/TP process had an approval rate of 99.9%, there would be hundreds of people every year who feel jaded, disillusioned and disappointed by it. My goal is to strive to get that approval rate as high as possible, but I also recognize that it's LITERALLY impossible to make 100% of you 100% happy 100% of the times, and this is just something that we have to accept, as I have. Nonetheless, people who express their opinions are very welcome, tho my skin is not quite thick enough to cope with some people who email me privately to shit all over my hard work (and the IOTD/TP staff work) of 13 years. But I'm working on it :-) If I where you I would randomly select IOTD and call it a day. People can submit to APOD if competing is what they want out of the hobby Like

AdrianC.

#...

· 1 like

Salvatore Iovene:
Some people will never be happy

It's also a matter of numbers. There are 365 IOTDs per year, and I think that we can all agree that there is PLENTY of subjectivity involved in selecting an IOTD. After all it's not only a matter of pure technique: there are subjective factors involved. Astrophotography, in my opinion, is the marriage or art, science and engineering.

Now for each of the 365 images, I'm sure that for each one there would be a 0.1% of people (at least) who hates it.

If 1000 people see the IOTD every day, every day there will be one person who thinks the process is a disgrace because this particular IOTD did not please them.

This means that even if the IOTD/TP process had an approval rate of 99.9%, there would be hundreds of people every year who feel jaded, disillusioned and disappointed by it.

My goal is to strive to get that approval rate as high as possible, but I also recognize that it's LITERALLY impossible to make 100% of you 100% happy 100% of the times, and this is just something that we have to accept, as I have.

Nonetheless, people who express their opinions are very welcome, tho my skin is not quite thick enough to cope with some people who email me privately to shit all over my hard work (and the IOTD/TP staff work) of 13 years. But I'm working on it :-)

If I where you I would randomly select IOTD and call it a day.

People can submit to APOD if competing is what they want out of the hobby

7.80 andrea tasselli #... · view views · 1 like
AdrianC.: If I where you I would randomly select IOTD and call it a day. Hey! That's mine. I proposed it like zillions of weeks ago. Like

11.99 Arun H #... · view views · 2 likes
Those who expressed a desire for change won out. Remove the negativity and it was a good and useful thread. I think these changes will begin the remove the idea of the IOTD as a contest and make it more the "Editor's Pick" of "Highlighted Image" that Andrea said it was. Like

20.43 Chris White- Overcast Observatory #... · view views · 2 likes
Today's image of the day showcases how very modest equipment can be used to achieve an excellent image: https://www.astrobin.com/tsiil1/B/ I don't think that equipment should be a consideration. Having excellent quality cookware doesn't guarantee you will make an excellent meal. Sure better scopes and skies help but this IOTD illustrates how important everything is after data collection. Like

7.33 Luka Poropat #... · view views · 4 likes
From these recent comments all I see is expression of envy. IOTD is not perfect by any means but Salvatore is already implementing stuff to make it better. Stuff changes, same as how images improve with newer software and hardware the IOTD is and should be improving in the future. Here I see few individuals that would rather talk about IOTD, rules & judges all day, instead of spending time improving their own images. This has been stated already, but IOTD is not a competition. However its also not a "everyone deserves a participation medal". I have few points to say about equipment: 1. Astrophotography is pay to win. If you dont accept that fact you will drive yourself crazy. 2. This is not a "best effort" or "look what he did with such equipment" award. 3. In a nutshell we are talking only images here. If judges are picking best images (they should not be looking with what or how they were made with) (this should change as it was before) AdrianC.: I don't get it either. It was taken with a 1 meter telescope. How is that backyard amateur astronomy? I happen to be one of those individuals using a 1 meter telescope and I can say its amateur astrophotography. Professional would mean I gain monetary value by doing astrophotography with that telescope (which I dont) and professional would also mean I am an expert in AP (which I am not). If we were talking about scientific contributions then yes, I would call it professional astronomy. Are people that produce official Hubble & JWST images professionals, well yes. Is a random Joe that happens to be a millionare and own a 2,5m ASA telescope on top of Chile using it for taking images of space just because he wants pretty pictures a professional? no its still considered amateur. To conclude, yes IOTD needs improvement, yes everyone who wants an IOTD or TP or TPN needs to step up their images if they want it that badly. Sometimes images are great and dont get rewarded. Are you gonna start another post complaining about it ? If you do astrophotography for the sole reason of winning prizes and awards, you are doing it for the wrong reasons. Like

7.33

Luka Poropat

#...

· 4 likes

From these recent comments all I see is expression of envy.
IOTD is not perfect by any means but Salvatore is already implementing stuff to make it better. Stuff changes, same as how images improve with newer software and hardware the IOTD is and should be improving in the future.

Here I see few individuals that would rather talk about IOTD, rules & judges all day, instead of spending time improving their own images.
This has been stated already, but IOTD is not a competition. However its also not a "everyone deserves a participation medal".

I have few points to say about equipment:
1. Astrophotography is pay to win. If you dont accept that fact you will drive yourself crazy.
2. This is not a "best effort" or "look what he did with such equipment" award.
3. In a nutshell we are talking only images here. If judges are picking best images (they should not be looking with what or how they were made with) (this should change as it was before)

AdrianC.:
I don't get it either. It was taken with a 1 meter telescope. How is that backyard amateur astronomy?

I happen to be one of those individuals using a 1 meter telescope and I can say its amateur astrophotography.
Professional would mean I gain monetary value by doing astrophotography with that telescope (which I dont) and professional would also mean I am an expert in AP (which I am not).
If we were talking about scientific contributions then yes, I would call it professional astronomy.

Are people that produce official Hubble & JWST images professionals, well yes.
Is a random Joe that happens to be a millionare and own a 2,5m ASA telescope on top of Chile using it for taking images of space just because he wants pretty pictures a professional? no its still considered amateur.

To conclude, yes IOTD needs improvement, yes everyone who wants an IOTD or TP or TPN needs to step up their images if they want it that badly.
Sometimes images are great and dont get rewarded. Are you gonna start another post complaining about it ?

If you do astrophotography for the sole reason of winning prizes and awards, you are doing it for the wrong reasons.

Alan Brunelle #... · view views · 9 likes
Bill Long - Dark Matters Astrophotography: Reviewer image made IOTD with this completely clipped to hades background, hexagon shaped stars. Faults that I would have deleted the data over. Never ever submitted at all..... I find it crude to find this sort of criticism posted on this site, even if trying to make a relevant (but really not) point. What is clear to me is that this person feels slighted by yet not receiving a IOTD award and feels compelled on taking it out on those who set up IOTD, who participate in decisions, or even those that get an award. The examples chosen in this particular criticism are all very much magnified and cropped, so us readers have no way to judge the overall impact that the full image made upon presentation. In fact, I have seen worse for APODs, so IOTD has no reason to be embarrassed by their product. Yes not every IOTD is perfect. Maybe this has already been stated on this thread, but I am a bit concerned that the primary complaintant here happens to run a commercial astroimaging data reseller service and perhaps has a monitary stake in how his images here are treated? His need to repeatedly show examples of "defective" IOTD images to make his point certainly invites a visit to his page. But the relentless pounding on this topic here seems to me to be an example of browbeating to get that IOTD on record. I do not have an issue with commercial participants displaying here. I don't know what the rules are on that, but I am sure @Salvatore Iovene welcomes all, because even professional astronomers do amateur astrophotography. And it is also nice to see what the individuals within the commercial imaging services can do. But if the person who is being so deeply critical of the IOTD process pick's on individuals, I find that to be a very poor way of promoting your business. At least in poor taste. As I have said before, many in this hobby enter it in a more advanced stage of life. This means aging physical sensory faculties, especially eyesight. It is hard to be so very critical of any images here, when the criticism is uninvited. Yes, you will say that IOTD necessarily should concentrate on the best of the best, but I am not talking about IOTD here, rather how and when criticism is leveled against individual images. Considering the other sub topic of money and equipment advantages and disadvantages, I find almost the same range in image quality when one limits the searches to, for example, Planewave 24 inch, etc. Yes the lesser equipment tends to have many more "novice" quality images, but that is understandable because of those just getting started in this sport tending to spend limited cash when getting their toes wet. Therefore many more have less advanced technical and processing skills. What I have seen from the "Planewave" segment is results that can be poor as well. So the statements here that if one spends $200k on a rig in Chile you automatically get great data and therefore great images. That is clearly false. (Considering the costs associated to own this sort of thing, or those using "purchased" data from the same class of optic, no doubt the age issue comes into play.) I love those wonderful images generated by that segment of the Astrobin community. And from those that have access to even professional optics. I want to see them! I do love pixel peeping. But honestly, I think if that is all there was, astrophotography would get dull very fast. As nice as these images from long, narrow, deep optics are, the subjects are limited, the results rapidly become redundant. While they have much to say about the anatomy of some of these objects, I know that I do not need to see the guts and every detail of any particular nebula, or galaxy to appreciate their place and relationship in the universe. I have seen fingerpaintings that are as interesting as many super-narrow-FOV, narrow-band Planewave 24 images. And what is more troubling, is that recently, many who process data from that class of optics have been overusing the AI sharpening tools available. Why? Perhaps they feel the heat from those generating images nearly as nice from a true backyard setup. I find it interesting that widefield and super widefield astro is getting so much attention. Including terrestrial/astro. Ask an AstroBin participant what they see in a super close view of Orion Nebula and you will hear everything about sharpness, color, noise, background, dynamic range, the Trapezium, etc, etc, ad nauseum. Ask a person off the street, i.e. the other 99.999...% of the world's population, what they see when shown the same picture and you will get, "nice finger painting"! So what is more important? APOD speaks to a much bigger slice of the world than IOTD. Maybe what Astrobin IOTD targets should consider that. Or maybe not. As I said before, I have no skin in this game. Yet I enjoy seeing the images, all the images. Even if some of them I have issues with. But as often as not, my issues have more concerns with presentation rather than technical acumen and perfection. In any case, this thread is pretty ugly and petty. Perhaps there could be a forum designed with rules to allow people to simply state their ideas for improvements to IOTD, but not allow for responses, other than limited to technical hurdles, etc. And any new forums that starts with "my image was better than that IOTD..." should be immediately deleted. If they want to get into that sort of thing, let them put that in the discussion of their images and then the rest of the community can use the comments section of their image to dump on them there. Normally I would end with "CS", but maybe more clouds would be healthy here... Alan Edited ... Like

Alan Brunelle

#...

· 9 likes

Bill Long - Dark Matters Astrophotography:
Reviewer image made IOTD with this completely clipped to hades background, hexagon shaped stars. Faults that I would have deleted the data over. Never ever submitted at all.....

I find it crude to find this sort of criticism posted on this site, even if trying to make a relevant (but really not) point. What is clear to me is that this person feels slighted by yet not receiving a IOTD award and feels compelled on taking it out on those who set up IOTD, who participate in decisions, or even those that get an award. The examples chosen in this particular criticism are all very much magnified and cropped, so us readers have no way to judge the overall impact that the full image made upon presentation. In fact, I have seen worse for APODs, so IOTD has no reason to be embarrassed by their product. Yes not every IOTD is perfect.

Maybe this has already been stated on this thread, but I am a bit concerned that the primary complaintant here happens to run a commercial astroimaging data reseller service and perhaps has a monitary stake in how his images here are treated? His need to repeatedly show examples of "defective" IOTD images to make his point certainly invites a visit to his page. But the relentless pounding on this topic here seems to me to be an example of browbeating to get that IOTD on record. I do not have an issue with commercial participants displaying here. I don't know what the rules are on that, but I am sure @Salvatore Iovene welcomes all, because even professional astronomers do amateur astrophotography. And it is also nice to see what the individuals within the commercial imaging services can do. But if the person who is being so deeply critical of the IOTD process pick's on individuals, I find that to be a very poor way of promoting your business. At least in poor taste.

As I have said before, many in this hobby enter it in a more advanced stage of life. This means aging physical sensory faculties, especially eyesight. It is hard to be so very critical of any images here, when the criticism is uninvited. Yes, you will say that IOTD necessarily should concentrate on the best of the best, but I am not talking about IOTD here, rather how and when criticism is leveled against individual images.

Considering the other sub topic of money and equipment advantages and disadvantages, I find almost the same range in image quality when one limits the searches to, for example, Planewave 24 inch, etc. Yes the lesser equipment tends to have many more "novice" quality images, but that is understandable because of those just getting started in this sport tending to spend limited cash when getting their toes wet. Therefore many more have less advanced technical and processing skills. What I have seen from the "Planewave" segment is results that can be poor as well. So the statements here that if one spends $200k on a rig in Chile you automatically get great data and therefore great images. That is clearly false. (Considering the costs associated to own this sort of thing, or those using "purchased" data from the same class of optic, no doubt the age issue comes into play.) I love those wonderful images generated by that segment of the Astrobin community. And from those that have access to even professional optics. I want to see them! I do love pixel peeping. But honestly, I think if that is all there was, astrophotography would get dull very fast. As nice as these images from long, narrow, deep optics are, the subjects are limited, the results rapidly become redundant. While they have much to say about the anatomy of some of these objects, I know that I do not need to see the guts and every detail of any particular nebula, or galaxy to appreciate their place and relationship in the universe. I have seen fingerpaintings that are as interesting as many super-narrow-FOV, narrow-band Planewave 24 images. And what is more troubling, is that recently, many who process data from that class of optics have been overusing the AI sharpening tools available. Why? Perhaps they feel the heat from those generating images nearly as nice from a true backyard setup. I find it interesting that widefield and super widefield astro is getting so much attention. Including terrestrial/astro. Ask an AstroBin participant what they see in a super close view of Orion Nebula and you will hear everything about sharpness, color, noise, background, dynamic range, the Trapezium, etc, etc, ad nauseum. Ask a person off the street, i.e. the other 99.999...% of the world's population, what they see when shown the same picture and you will get, "nice finger painting"! So what is more important?

APOD speaks to a much bigger slice of the world than IOTD. Maybe what Astrobin IOTD targets should consider that. Or maybe not. As I said before, I have no skin in this game. Yet I enjoy seeing the images, all the images. Even if some of them I have issues with. But as often as not, my issues have more concerns with presentation rather than technical acumen and perfection.

In any case, this thread is pretty ugly and petty. Perhaps there could be a forum designed with rules to allow people to simply state their ideas for improvements to IOTD, but not allow for responses, other than limited to technical hurdles, etc. And any new forums that starts with "my image was better than that IOTD..." should be immediately deleted. If they want to get into that sort of thing, let them put that in the discussion of their images and then the rest of the community can use the comments section of their image to dump on them there.

Normally I would end with "CS", but maybe more clouds would be healthy here...

Alan

Edited ...

11.41 Timothy Martin #... · view views · 5 likes
I think this is all really wonderful and I'm very impressed by @Arun H's ability to maintain the high road, adjust his expectations, and remain civil throughout this discussion. As for my image, which got pilloried pretty hard in this thread, it is what it is. I did the best with it that I knew how. One thing I think that has been lost in this thread is that there's more to producing a compelling image than perfect stars, impeccable black points everywhere, and exactly the right amount of noise and extreme detail throughout the field. I'm in this avocation to reach people. I don't know how well or how badly I'm doing with that, but again, I'm doing my utmost. Here's the best discussion I've ever seen on that topic, and it's one I've taken to heart: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BI191gHIhqM Like

11.41

Timothy Martin

#...

· 5 likes

I think this is all really wonderful and I'm very impressed by @Arun H's ability to maintain the high road, adjust his expectations, and remain civil throughout this discussion. As for my image, which got pilloried pretty hard in this thread, it is what it is. I did the best with it that I knew how. One thing I think that has been lost in this thread is that there's more to producing a compelling image than perfect stars, impeccable black points everywhere, and exactly the right amount of noise and extreme detail throughout the field. I'm in this avocation to reach people. I don't know how well or how badly I'm doing with that, but again, I'm doing my utmost. Here's the best discussion I've ever seen on that topic, and it's one I've taken to heart:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BI191gHIhqM

Salvatore Iovene #... · view views · 3 likes
Alan Brunelle: Perhaps there could be a forum designed with rules to allow people to simply state their ideas for improvements to IOTD, but not allow for responses, other than limited to technical hurdles, etc. Back in the day, when there were public forums related to discussing AstroBin, 90% of the posts were about the IOTD, the Likes, how unfair it was that "my image didn't get an award", and how the IOTD/TP should be split into categories. I had to explain the same reasons over and over again, because admittedly if you don't think it thru, categories are a good idea. The idea, tho, falls apart as soon as you put a bit more thought into it. Additionally, there were lots of bug reports and that gave people the impression that AstroBin was riddled with bugs. It's not, but as 10,000 people visit the site daily, if 1 encounters a rare bug every day, there would be lots of posts. Long story shorts, I shut down those forums with the goal of making the AstroBin forums a place for people to discuss Astronomy and Astrophotography. I did work to improve the forums as a platform and it worked, and AstroBin's forums today are pretty successful, IMHO. However, people accused me of stifling discourse, of being deaf to criticism, of sticking my head in the sand. In reality, I set up a Zendesk instance and concentrated support requests in a single place, so that it's easier for me to prioritize and address support tickets. Eventually, I created this forum here that's in a group that people must join before they can see the posts. Joining is free and the group is public, but at least it contains things a bit while giving people a voice. This is to say that this: Alan Brunelle: And any new forums that starts with "my image was better than that IOTD..." should be immediately deleted. would be met with unprecedented levels of protests. Truth is, I'm an engineer and not a marketer. I prefer to put my head down and do the work. I should probably put more efforts in PR and singing praise to AstroBin and its features... but that's not me 🤷‍♂️ Like

Salvatore Iovene

#...

· 3 likes

Alan Brunelle:
Perhaps there could be a forum designed with rules to allow people to simply state their ideas for improvements to IOTD, but not allow for responses, other than limited to technical hurdles, etc.

Back in the day, when there were public forums related to discussing AstroBin, 90% of the posts were about the IOTD, the Likes, how unfair it was that "my image didn't get an award", and how the IOTD/TP should be split into categories. I had to explain the same reasons over and over again, because admittedly if you don't think it thru, categories are a good idea. The idea, tho, falls apart as soon as you put a bit more thought into it.

Additionally, there were lots of bug reports and that gave people the impression that AstroBin was riddled with bugs. It's not, but as 10,000 people visit the site daily, if 1 encounters a rare bug every day, there would be lots of posts.

Long story shorts, I shut down those forums with the goal of making the AstroBin forums a place for people to discuss Astronomy and Astrophotography. I did work to improve the forums as a platform and it worked, and AstroBin's forums today are pretty successful, IMHO.

However, people accused me of stifling discourse, of being deaf to criticism, of sticking my head in the sand. In reality, I set up a Zendesk instance and concentrated support requests in a single place, so that it's easier for me to prioritize and address support tickets.

Eventually, I created this forum here that's in a group that people must join before they can see the posts. Joining is free and the group is public, but at least it contains things a bit while giving people a voice.

This is to say that this:

Alan Brunelle:
And any new forums that starts with "my image was better than that IOTD..." should be immediately deleted.

would be met with unprecedented levels of protests. Truth is, I'm an engineer and not a marketer. I prefer to put my head down and do the work. I should probably put more efforts in PR and singing praise to AstroBin and its features... but that's not me 🤷‍♂️

	Distinct awarded users	Total awarded images
Image of the day
Top picks
Top pick nominations

	Image of the day	Top pick	Top pick nominations	Total submitted
Deep sky
Solar system
Extremely wide field
Star trails
Northern lights
Noctilucent clouds
Landscape

	Image of the day	Top pick	Top pick nominations	Total submitted
Backyard
Traveller
Own remote observatory
Amateur hosting facility
Public amaeteur data
Professional, scientific grade data
Mix of multiple sources
Other
Unknown

Image Index:

Contribution Index (beta):

IOTD and Why It Needs Improvement AstroBin Platform open discussions community forum · Bill Long - Dark Matters Astrophotography · ... · 281 · 8974 · 3

Image Index:

Contribution Index (beta):

IOTD and Why It Needs Improvement AstroBin Platform open discussions community forum · Bill Long - Dark Matters Astrophotography · ... · 281 · 8974 · 3

Sorry

Sorry

Sorry :-(

Sorry

Sorry

Sorry

Sorry :-(

Sorry

Sorry

Sorry

Sorry :-(

Sorry

Sorry

Sorry

Sorry :-(

Sorry

Sorry

Sorry

Sorry :-(

Sorry

Sorry

Sorry

Sorry :-(

Sorry

Sorry

Sorry

Sorry :-(

Sorry

Sorry

Sorry

Sorry :-(

Sorry

Sorry

Sorry

Sorry :-(

Sorry

Sorry

Sorry

Sorry :-(

Sorry

Sorry

Sorry

Sorry :-(

Sorry

Sorry

Sorry

Sorry :-(

Sorry

Sorry

Sorry

Sorry :-(

Sorry

Sorry

Sorry

Sorry :-(

Sorry

Sorry

Sorry

Sorry :-(

Sorry

Sorry

Sorry

Sorry :-(

Sorry

Sorry

Sorry

Sorry :-(

Sorry

Sorry

Sorry

Sorry :-(

Sorry

Sorry

Sorry

Sorry :-(

Sorry

Sorry