›

PI fundamentals suggestion

Steven Panish
in PixInsight
I am a recent fundamentals purchaser and have a few suggestions for this impressive body of material.

1) It would be valuable to have a (very) short text file for each video which summarizes the main points.  As with a bulleted list.  

2) There is a great deal of duplication in the material.  For instance, "Through the Gas" covers essentially identical material to a subsequent video on weighting.  The "path" could be refined to eliminate the duplication.  Suggestion 1) above would help deal with this and save users time.

Overall, the videos are well done and the information is very (almost too) accessible.  My suggestions might help the reorganization mentioned in Adam's recent email.

Thanks Adam!
«1

Comments

  • Scott Cunningham
    edited February 27
    I would agree with this. Thanks, Steven. I would also suggest adding a workflow chart to each processing example. I know that Adam says it's not about the workflow, but it really helps those of us who don't have 20 years experience doing this to understand how different workflow approaches produce the best results for particular objects, particular equipment, and monochrome vs. color cameras, etc. There ARE patterns in the workflows that Adam shows in the examples, and it would be extremely helpful to have a visual chart to see what stays the same, and what is different across his various examples. I can't just listen to 10 hours of him talking and actually get much out of it. I need to have a visual chart so I can follow along. Not everyone is verbally oriented. I need workflow charts for each example. That would save me SO much time and headaches and rewinding and constantly drawing charts on the whiteboard in my processing room, so I can compare workflows and how they affect the overall quality of the finished product.

    Thanks!
  • BlockHeadBlockHead
    I will take your feedback and work it into the new content.

    Scott: Just a quick point. "I tried Adam's workflow and it did not work for me." 
    That always stings and people rely too heavily on literal steps... because they do not see the patterns in the steps- only a sequence of steps to follow. Kinda like following a path of bread crumbs and not looking up to see the destination is in view. I followed the trail..but didn't end up at the destination kinda of thing.

    Another point- those workflow charts change...often. E.g. I am currently redoing FastTrack Training. PI implemented two minor changes. 1. Cosmetic Correction in WBPP. 2. Moved Image Solved to the "Astrometry" section of Scripts. These two items alone are making me redo my content because beginners see a deviation from their newer experience compared to my older content. The more work I have to do to make everything perfect...the more I will need to charge. I doubt I can charge more no matter how good the content. (I really really tried in Comet Academy and in Narrowband FastTrack.)

    Anyway, just some of the items I need to balance in order to get to the desired level that most people want.

    The funny thing is... I am told over and over that people today have short attention spans and just want to dive in and "fail fast." Demonstrations do allow them to do this. But this kind of way of thinking does not motivate me to make charts and things that people will not read. I guess what I really need to do is find out how many people actually utilize auxiliary material. 

    I do think the suggestion above to try to highlight the differences between one demonstration and another is good. 

    -the Blockhead
  • Mark Earhard
    edited February 28
    So...  Seeing as how this is a fundamentals suggestion post I'm going to add to the suggestions above that I agree with, because I am a new purchaser, with deep technical knowledge, and I'm thoroughly confused:

    1.  Having advertisements above the content, which is buried below, is not conducive to figuring out where to start, or in fact feeling that you've actually landed on the page with the content you've purchased.  Have a password protected page with a list of the fundamentals videos in order that is the main landing page for that product, and guide the user through the content from video to video without jumping around.  Make the user feel like they're on the correct page for the product.

    2.  Having "Step one" go to a page with a video, and a list of videos, is confusing.  Do I go through all of those videos now or do I just watch the step one video and then go back and do step two?  This should be easy to clean up.

    3.  The list of videos referred to in the "step one" list is pretty clearly out of order.  That should be very simple to fix, and the videos should have some level of continuity that helps guide the user through the materials.  The problem at the moment is that I do not have the necessary knowledge to know what order those videos are supposed to be in, leading to further confusion.  Should these video links even be on the page with the video for that particular step, or should they be on the main product page?

    Honestly the videos are well done and you clearly are an expert.  The problem is that it's disorganized and it's only semi clear how to progress.  It may make perfect sense in your mind, but put yourself in the shoes of someone new to the hobby (I'm not) and new to PixInsight (I've been using it badly for some time) and organize the material for the lowest common denominator.

    I think the root of the problem may be that you've come back and re-done several of the videos (thank you, that makes the price worth it) and left some of the older videos that haven't changed, and at this point it feels like a bit of a hodge podge.  My criticisms are chiefly with the list of videos on this page.

    Again, my (hopefully constructive) criticism isn't about the materials, there's lots to learn here, but the organization of the site needs a makeover to make it less confusing and flow linearly, and the landing page for fundamentals, once purchased, should be free and clear of "advertising cruft".  

    The person above who suggested bullet points (chapters in the video would be amazing) for the videos is spot on.  Is what I want to see in "WBPP" or "WBPP discussion"? 

    All of that said, I'm optimistic I'm going to be a better processor of data after figuring out how to use the materials, but doing an organizational pass and reorganizing the fundamentals page would reduce confusion, and unnecessary friction.

    I haven't even looked at the rest of fundamentals, I've just started fast track.
  • BlockHeadBlockHead
    edited February 28
    HI Mark,

    1. This is fixed on the new site. Working on this. 
    2. Fixed on the new site. But see below...
    3. I believe you are talking about FastTrack Training. See the picture below...there is a video on the FastTrack
    ( https://drive.google.com/file/d/11CkME_-n1KZx4_OkGrOswJVKLMrWMxqj/view?usp=sharing)  Training page I ask to watch first (because, yeah apparently I confused people). FastTrack was supposed to be we learn something... then YOU do something with a follow up video. I have an arrow that indicates that as well. Step 1..then go horizontal. Then go down.  But you can't fight the crowd! So this will not be presented in this way on the new site. 
    4. More generally on my site when I built it- it was not possible to build the content and make a logical progression to step through it. Instead everything was grouped by category.  However, later I did make an ordering. In Fundamentals I have the Fundamentals Path which is exactly what you are asking for... I list each video in the precise order you can follow for the most coherent experience. 
    5. The list of videos that concerns you on that page are RELATED videos. They are not the order to follow. I had started making this an available feature so people would not need to use the back button. But as you found- it needs precise tagging of content and upkeep. Almost impossible. The new site takes care of this. 

    Do watch that video. On Fastrack the order it is:


    Step 3:  Examine MANY Images    
    Etc...
    -the Blockhead

  • Mark Earhard
    edited February 28
    Thanks I did watch that video and I think I understand how to approach the material now.  Very much appreciate your detailed answer.  :)
  • Scott Cunningham
    edited February 28
    I think you need some partners in this endeavor with multiple viewpoints and teaching strategies. I used to work as a QA consultant for website content after many years of software engineering for backend database work as well as aerospace engineering. It's hard for those who are emersed in the day to day grind of generating content to see the big picture. It would definitely help to have other eyeballs and hands involved with massaging out the perfect Pixinsight teaching platform. 

    I have often wondered why there are not 100s of thousands of users and viewers using, subscribing and liking your content, because it is the very knowledge that people are hungering for in astrophotography, beginners and experienced alike! There may be reasons for that.

    I'm retired and just travel around in my RV, and doing some astronomy outreach programs (Grand Canyon North Rim Star Party), as well as some pick-and-choose consulting work for small engineering projects. Got nothing else to do...

  • Scott Cunningham
    edited February 28
    Attached is a set of workflow charts from the PixInsight website itself that would be perfect for here. Of course, it's all behind yet ANOTHER paywall, lol. I learn much better when I can follow a pattern of steps, visually. I've been doing all this on an intermediate/advanced level for a couple years now. When I process an object, it is usually the first time I am processing that object, since I tend to dedicate the whole couple weeks around the new moon to just one object (30 to 40 hours or more, SHO monochrome).

    So, each object is usually new to me, as well as how to approach processing it. I need *something* to start from, like a sample workflow, which I can then modify per the particular characteristics of that object. They're all different, of course! But having at least *some* pre-determined set of guidelines will help, or I'll just be sitting here, wondering what to do next. Do I just do what I did on some other object, or try something new, or what? The thought of wading and fast-forwarding through 10+ hours of videos (again) just to get that 30 seconds of material that I actually needed to get moving again leaves me in a self-deletion sort of mood. I have already watched most of the horizons and fasttrack stuff, but there is no way I can instantly recall 100s of hours of mostly verbal material. 

    I end up sitting here, duplicating and creating and re-creating workflow charts that highlight specific aspects of different targets and how to squeeze the most out of my data in a pleasing, artistic, as well as scientific way. With several more years of practice, I think I will have learned most of this material to the point where I won't need any more "cheat" sheets or have to reference workflow charts, or parts of workflow charts.

    The key point that needs to be drilled is practice, practice, practice, and then repeat, again and again. But having some "cheat" sheets would make that process *so* much more pleasant.

    As a software engineer, you soon realize that you simply cannot write an effective program without first generating a logical flow chart for it. Sure, you can try, but it's going to be a mish-mash of poorly constructed code that does not behave as you expect it to.

    I hope the uploaded image of the Pixinsight workflows shows up here. It's been sitting on "Uploading" the whole time I've been writing and editing this comment.

    Thanks for all your work. I am sure you get overloaded with constructive as well as destructive criticism!

    image




  • Scott Cunningham
    edited February 28

  • Mark Earhard
    @Scott Cunningham Doesn't look like your attachment came through, do you have an url?
  • BlockHeadBlockHead
    Scott,

    I did begin taking all of these suggestions into account.

    1. I indicate in my introductory videos (top of the page when you log in) that you can start with the Workflow examples if you want. 
    2. Look at the very first workflow example:
    You will see I have a PDF that has the exact thing you are looking for.

    I did listen to the feedback of others and I have been implementing this for some time.

    Also... did you see that the other member did in FastTrack?
    It is one of the bottom links on the page (A "Cheat Sheet")

    Keep in mind that FastTrack is just the beginning of the entire set of Fundamentals courses. 

    -the Blockhead
  • Scott Cunningham
    This is *way* better for a workflow chart. I mean really detailed. That one you have for narrowband is too generic to be useful.

    Here is the link to what I'm talking about:

  • Scott Cunningham
    Adam,

    BTW, I just wanted to mention that since going through your Horizons, Narrowband Fasttrack, and other content on your site, I was able to score a Top Pick on Astrobin. That reallty means something to me. It's only been a few months since I started your coursework.

    Thanks!

  • Mark Earhard
    Thanks Scott, I found that page too, it's very nice.  Thanks for pointing it out.
  • BlockHeadBlockHead
    I agree... those diagrams are very nice.
    I think they do require context with explanations... but graphically well done.
    -the Blockhead
  • Scott Cunningham
    edited March 1
    Yes, for each example that you do, there should be a corresponding workflow chart, so we can follow along, and reproduce easily as we are working. This greatly helps to see how things are connected across different workflow paths. I often forget about Histogram Equalization as part of my contrast improvement and it helps to have a flowchart handy so I remember what all the tools are at my disposal. You need to have complete walkthroughs to get people interested (so they can initially reproduce what you are doing), and *then* dive into the nitty gritty once we are hooked and want even better results and better understanding of what we are actually doing under the covers.
  • Terri in Vermont
    Hi Adam, I came across this just now.    I remember having that discussion with you as you were first embarking on this whole endeavor and suggesting that something written is very helpful to go along with the videos.   I still feel strongly on this.   I'm coming back to look for a particular processing flow point and it's forcing me to sift through videos because I can't tell from the videos, where this point might be made (for narrowband).    I think by not documenting the flow, and options of course, you risk motivating others to do it and then become the reference even if you may have done the groundwork.   

    Best,
    Terri
  • Edward Smith
    I just ran across this thread and rather than starting a new one, I thought I'd just add a suggestion here.  Hopefully people are still monitoring it.

    I've gone through the first 38 sections (I won't say videos because some of them have multiple videos associated with them) and am up to DBE.  They've been very helpful and, after completing the Fast Track training, I've been following along with my own data (more fun anyway).  I thought that when we got done with WBPP and Calibration, the next obvious subject would be color combination, but DBE was next so I assumed you just did that on each color separately before combining the data.  And then I watched Section 37 (DBE 2002 Update) where it said you were better off doing this after you'd combined the color data.  

    But wait, we hadn't talked about combining the color data yet.  Fast Track didn't even really cover it.  So I looked down the path, scrolled down....and down....and down...and finally found LRGB Blending at Section 99 (and it is a full hour video so there is obviously a lot to talk about).  The description even contains the line "This step of creating a color image is not typically given much thought and fraught with undesirable results."  

    As I read the description, I thought "No kidding."  It would be very helpful to re-order this step to immediately after WBPP.  I know that the Fundamentals Path isn't intended as a workflow, but if subsequent steps work with color images, it probably makes sense to talk about how to combine the images before them.

    Great videos, I'm learning a lot.

  • BlockHeadBlockHead
    I will be attending to this.
    I am remaking FastTrack.
    It will have both OSC and Mono workflows as part of it.

    -the Blockhead
  • Edward Smith
    Great.  Thank you very much.  Your videos aren't only a great teaching tool, but I'm finding them a valuable reference for when things don't work quite as expected.  I can't imagine the amount of time you spend not only on the videos, but also on responding to questions and comments.  Thank you very much.
  • Mark Earhard
    Having the mono workflow as pat of it will be awesome, thank you.

    I'm jumping around a bit, I want to follow along with my own data too, so I'm sort of doing that while jumping between videos, and trying to watch entire sections when I get to them.

    I'm using your example workflows as a starting point, then go to the additional videos at each step for further details.
Sign In or Register to comment.