New tools survey

[Jack Harvey]

Well after a bit over a week here are the stats for the leading contenders.
1.  Documentation (7)
2. & 3.  Star Statistics and Project Capability (save workflow or PI state) (4)
4.  Batch Processing Tool (3)
5., 6. & 7.  DeBloom, Narrow Band Combine & Layers (2)

It would seem the number 1 request, Documentation does not , and should not, require Juan to do the work (he is more valuable doing what he is doing).  So do we expand the tools we have (Harrys videos, RBAs docs, wiki) or do we embark on a new project such as a set of complete .videos like are available for other programs.  [My vote would be an expanded RBA type document with links that take you to the associated video.  We also need a video that takes one from start to finish in a image processing session.]  So we could form a committee to attack this issue, Harry, RBA?  Then we all need to be able to contribute or become "expert" on some small part and contribute.  Maybe a couple of videos would be better I. PreProcessing which would be Calibration, registration and Integration to produce masters.  II  Basic Processing

Carlos has mentioned he will work on the star stats but he is very busy and perhaps someone with those programming skills could help form a committee to solve this issue

Project Capability is obviously a script, so.......

Nikolay is also working on a automated program for image processing is my understanding

Anybody want the Batch Process script that could morph into a tool?

Layers requires more discussion, elucidation and Juan IMO

So that is my summary.  I have zero programming skills so guess this is where I get off?    

[mmirot]

Actually integration/Cal  Batch processing got four if read it right.

I think documentation is the clear winner.

BTW, I just got ridiculed on the SBIG list for recommending PI.

Two folks say they own it currently, but would not recommend it to others without official documentation.
It is time this get fixed.

As  business decision alone I think Juan should consider it #1 task.

Max

[sreilly]

Ray Gralak being one of the two carries some weight. He not only has written several applications but also the Astro Physics V2 driver so he has a fair amount of voice. As far as who does the documentation, who really knows the program throughly enough to write a through help document? 

[Harry page]

Hi

while I am more than willing to continue my little effort in the PI dept I do agree that perhaps only a few people know PI very well with expertise
in all tools , I certainly are not that man  :'(and class myself as a intermediate user so full highly detailed answers will never come from me  as I am not bright enough 
But then again this was not the idea of my original video's i.e they were "video's for newbies"

good discussion keep going gents

Harry

[sleshin]

Count me as another vote for documentation. I think a comprehensive video tutorial like the DVD Adam Block did for CCDStack would be ideal.

Steve

[Jack Harvey]

Wait a minute.  I think the purpose of documentation is to teach newbies how to do basics.  Once you get past that then you use the forum and the expertise of the more experienced users IMO.  It is impractical to have a "Expert's Guide" to PI, just too many tools, workflows and variations.  When I was an intern I learned ONE way to deal with the various medical problems we encountered.  As a resident I learned there was more than one way and discussion among the fellows and staff helped guide my choice.  As chief resident I was expected to know all the ways to deal with a problem and how to select the best one.  The documentation should be at the intern/first year resident level IMO.

BTW  How come we hear about all these people having problems running PI, but we never see them post a question on the forum???

[Jack Harvey]

Here is a documentation issue we are going to need to deal with for users of all levels.  The forum has gotten so big it is difficult to find a specific thread or topic on one particular tool or process.  Often I think "ahh I read that once" and after searching for 5 minutes sometimes do not find the thread I was remembering because the answer I wanted was actually hidden in another thread.  What if we had a subtopic for each tool or process?  SO you have a decon question you go to that part of the forum and there are all the recent decon threads?

[Harry page]

Count me as another vote for documentation. I think a comprehensive video tutorial like the DVD Adam Block did for CCDStack would be ideal.

Steve

Please remember even though I am sure Adams video's are excellent they are a 100 bucks and not free ( perfectly entitled he is to do so ) and I am glad that it is has been said that the docs should not be to hard , look at the reputation PI has at the moment ( hard to use ) so imagine it if you gave a highly technical explanation of every tool  

I think a bit further along the line someone will do some professional ( not free ) video / books about PI , but this will not be next week

Harry

[mmirot]

All good points Jack.

The poll suggests it is want it.

It is no longer on the top of my list but I know my way around mostly.

I think Harrys web documentation is tops so far.  I think it is probably 65% complete
(BTW, an overview of the how the UI works is my a suggestion for the next entry. Many people don't even understand drag and drop!)

If was Juan I would just get him to do this officially for PI ( at least for awhile ).
Juan and others could provide the missing pieces and act as editors/ contributer.

In general most people want the basics and the details of what each button does.
Complex tutorials are not required but a few tips and basic examples on how to use a module or menu command would be helpful.  

Max

Videos are great but this not what most people are referring to.

[mmirot]

Count me as another vote for documentation. I think a comprehensive video tutorial like the DVD Adam Block did for CCDStack would be ideal.

Steve

Please remember even though I am sure Adams video's are excellent they are a 100 bucks and not free ( perfectly entitled he is to do so ) and I am glad that it is has been said that the docs should not be to hard , look at the reputation PI has at the moment ( hard to use ) so imagine it if you gave a highly technical explanation of every tool  

I think a bit further along the line someone will do some professional ( not free ) video / books about PI , but this will not be next week

Harry

Harry,

BTW, I think you have gift for this.
You lay out what everything does in reasonible detail then give suggestions and clarifications.
Also, the way it is anotated on the HTML is real clean.

Max

[Harry page]

BTW  How come we hear about all these people having problems running PI, but we never see them post a question on the forum???

I do get quite a lot of personal emails asking Pi questions as I think not everybody is as willing as me to ask what might be silly questions , even though we all know the only silly question is one that is not asked

Harry

[Harry page]

I think Harrys web documentation is tops so far.  I think it is probably 65% complete
(BTW, an overview of the how the UI works is my a suggestion for the next entry. Many people don't even understand drag and drop!)

I think your "65% is complete" is a bit generous I thought about 25% , so I better get on with it 

Harry

[sreilly]

Not sure many are taking the time as I suspect that many are running the trial and may feel overwhelmed. I know I tried the earlier versions before it was a program to buy and it left me totally confused. It was that the structure and terms were foreign to me. Like going from using FrontPage to Dreamweaver but at least there was documentation on each. Many spend so much time gathering the data, they end up just processing it as they first learned and don't invest the time to use PI. That's how it was for me. I must have downloaded and installed the early versions several times and then some years later finally bought it determined to learn it. And I haven't spent the amount of time I wanted to even still. That's why I'm trying hard to take the instruction at Alder.

As for PemPro, there was extensive documentation that took you through the entire process. I've had it since day one and never had any trouble using it. Many questions were asked mostly for specific mount issues. That in itself was a major feat in that Ray seemed to have all those different mount answers or at least shortly after being asked. I have to say that a program that operates hardware will have the most likely difficulty because of the vast differences in hardware. Now the acquired data, that is basically all needing the same processing. Let me clarify that, once the data is acquired by another program, the same processes should have the same desired results. One shot color vs mono having several steps more. So I'm saying that the processes should have the same effect on the data it's being used on. The differences will be controlled via the processor and the chosen settings. It is also that person's responsibility to choose an appropriate process to use on the data and in the proper sequence such as data reduction, alignment, stacking, background extraction and so on.
 

BTW  How come we hear about all these people having problems running PI, but we never see them post a question on the forum???

BTW#2 when Ray Gralak's PemPro program first came out many years ago it was not that easy to run either<G>.

[sreilly]

While I agree that Harry's videos are very useful, they got me started, they are basic. It is also very handy to have searchable text to be able to query for things like "Star Mask" and get a fast index of topics. As far as the DVDs that I have, as well as others mentioned, they are usually intended to take you through a series of processes from start to finish. The best I've seen were actually for using Photoshop on astronomical images by Tony Hallas. While I have bought Tony's as well as Adam's, heck I spent 2 nights up at Kitt Peak, I don't necessarily want to use their style. I've been working on my own and that's what I would expect from any one's approach. I bought and read both of Ron's books on imaging. The biggest differences in the references are how much detail is given to what is being done mathematically versus why you do it. As with Harry's videos, it would be nice to touch briefly on what the other settings do. At least that would give you some idea if you even wanted to try to use them. But as I have said before, I'm not aware of any videos that goes over the basic process from start to finish on any image. I realize that there will be differences for the type of image, galaxy, nebula, comet and so on but there are certain basics that they all need and in the same order. Suggestions for the different classes of objects can be suggested with brief explanations as to why you might use this tool or that process.

But again, who is in the better position to explain why a particular tool or process even exists in the program than the author? Who is the grand expert in PI design that has the answers? I know that Juan is busy with more requests and adding features, heck I'd love to have the Bloom tool now, but it's only going to become a bigger problem as more is added. Now is the time to bite the bullet and get this task done At least a good basic document that can be expanded with more detail as time permits. In retrospect, it would have been much easier in the beginning and just have added the new features as time went on. But this is a mature program now and very powerful but not as many will know without the documentation to read. The videos and DVDs are added bonuses that supplement.

As far as Juan doing this on his own, not really necessary as there appear to be a fair number that know enough to take on parts of this task but Juan should be the editor and put it all together so it reflects what the program is and what it can do..

Sorry about being so long winded but I see great potential in the program and would love to see it become very successful.

I think Harrys web documentation is tops so far.  I think it is probably 65% complete
(BTW, an overview of the how the UI works is my a suggestion for the next entry. Many people don't even understand drag and drop!)

I think your "65% is complete" is a bit generous I thought about 25% , so I better get on with it 

Harry

[NKV]

Image Integration process - AutoSave result to file

BR,
Nikolay.