IIS Almanac - quantification

[Omaroo]

Referring to my original post (http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=46438) in reference to production of an Ice In Space "Almanac", I'm attempting to gather some figures to quantify the number of people that might:

1) contribute an image set (main astrophoto plus personal/rig image) to the almanac.

2) would be interested in purchasing a copy in reasonably short time - and what they'd feel comfortable spending.

With these figues, I'll ultimately know how many pages to shoot for, and whether we can afford to have a full double page dedicated to each member, or whether we have to bite the bullet and squish ourselves on to a single page each. The cost of the book would nearly halve if we could.

[jjjnettie]

Can't see a problem with squishing it into a single page Chris.
All of my images look best if you don't look too close at them.

[asterisk]

Chris

Great idea. Haven't you got enough to do?

[iceman]

Chris you might like to put a link in your initial post, linking to the original thread which started it all (for people coming in late on the idea).

[Omaroo]

Good idea Mike. They're cross-referenced now.

[toryglen-boy]

nice one mate, you have this very well organised.

count me in


:thumbsup:

[astroron]

I voted No for contributing an image as I am not an imager:whistle:
But I voted yes in purchasing a copy :thumbsup:

[duncan]

Hi All,
I voted "not sure" for an image as i'm in the process of getting gear.
But i will definately buy one regardless. It would be nice to contribute though.
Cheers,
Duncan:thumbsup:

[Enchilada]

Almanac - an annual calendar containing important dates and statistical information such as astronomical data and tide tables.

Will this "calendar" have astronomical data too? What will/ should it have?

Furthermore, is it made for profit?? :shrug:

[Omaroo]

"Almanac" - also: an annual reference book of useful and interesting facts. Hence the cover title: "Ice in Space 2009 Almanac". My original thought was that it may turn into a yearly offering if demand warranted it.

The book will be comprised of images of objects within our viewable sky, and will be accompanied by relevant positional data associated with those objects. Images will hopefully be unique, and possibly presented in Messier or NGC order. Instructions on imaging and processing techniques and rigs associated with the capture of said images will also be included. In this context it could easily be seen as a reference book. Do I take it that you question the validity of this?

Profit? Probably some absolutely marginal profit, yes. The site has to run somehow. I'm volunteering my editorial services to gather all the peoples' work and put it together in a design-conscious manner. Whether Mike decides to take up this offer or not remains to be seen. I'm not in it for any profit - and I'm not sure why you'd ask. Surely a small percentage of profits going to the upkeep and expansion of IIS would be seen by members as fair and quite frankly obvious.

[Lismore Bloke]

I think that the outline supplied by Chris is excellent and have no problem if the project makes a profit: assuming that it is to proceed to print. Facts and figures really should only relate to the objects portrayed. The project, after all, is meant to be a portfolio of the truly excellent work being done by the very clever IIS imagers. I'm a visual observer and have no issue with imagers' work dominating content. We all should be thanking Chris for volunteering his pre-press expertise to set up and layout the project to professional press standards. I know from personal experience how time consuming that can be.

[jjjnettie]

Thanks Chris.:D

[iceman]

I will send out an e-newsletter to all IIS members in the next few days and direct them to this thread so that more people can contribute to the poll.

[wavelandscott]

Interesting idea but not my cup of tea...good luck with it!

[Omaroo]

That'd be great Mike. It'll give us a far more accurate indication as to how many pages we're likely to be filling.

[Jen]

:lol::lol::lol: lol JJJ

Yeah if i was good enough i would share my pics for sure ;)

[kinetic]

I say do it!
Don't doubt the idea, don't discuss the negatives....
Technology changes so fast these days that the whole concept
of IIS may not be around for another 5 years and the unselfish
efforts of the main players for the last 5 usually have gone unrecognised.

We all get something from this place, I personally would treasure having a
copy of an IIS Almanac 2009, even if it only happened once.
I was there, I was a part of it (albeit insignificant).
Great idea Chris.
My 2 cents.

Steve

[BerrieK]

Jen you should try to get your shots included and share; it would be great to have them there.

Kerrie

[Enchilada]

Just an open question. I asked only if it contained planetary ephemeris data. (Something as other Almanacs contain; I.e. "The Old Farmer's Almanac" since 1792, which has sunrise and sunset, twilights, tides, visible planets, lists of bright stars. http://www.almanac.com/extras/2009/pdf/002_09OFE.pdf

I'd be happy to provide such data if required.



Thanks for the clarification.
It could have included planetary images - hence an planetary ephemeris of kinds.



No, not at all.



Fair enough. However the assumption; "...and quite frankly obvious", for me, was not. Also I thought IIS was a basically "non-profit"? (I admit I could be wrong here.)
Also, I'd assume the profit would be therefore viewed as "donation", as it says in the IIS. Legalistically it is also has some interesting questions, like, I.e. who'd own the rights to contributions?

"A number of people have offered to make a monetary contribution in order to support the up-keep of IceInSpace. If you would like to make a contribution, please see our Donate to IceInSpace page. We appreciate your support."

Also with "Donate to ISS" http://www.iceinspace.com.au/donate.html;

"This whole project has been a labour of love for me, I haven't done it to make money."

Alternatively, such a document could also have been distributed electronically for free (pdf).

** In the end all I done is state an open comment here and I've only asked questions. (Difficult, they may be...)

[Omaroo]

"Make a profit" simply implies that the on-sale price might exceed the procurement and distribution cost. In the case of the 2009 Almanac (if that's what it even ends up being called), this modest margin (if any) might, for instance, go towards funding expanded IISAC activities, and also towards ensuring the longevity of this very website - good for IIS web users alike.

By using the term "imager" I'm not sure where I excluded planetary.



Call it that if you will. Take it up with Mike, hey? I'm not going to bite. I'm just offering my services in a mechanical capacity here - no more, no less.

Contributors would be listed and declared as copywrite owners of their own images. Intellectual property rights (style, format of the publication as a whole) would probably be copyright IIS.

[Omaroo]

Thanks Steve. I agree - let's just do it. As long as we don't have to commit to large print runs that might or might not be sold - I can't see any real problems.

[Enchilada]

Bite? I've only asked a few questions here.



Thanks.

[Enchilada]

IMO. Any idea always has its pros and cons.

The originally question by Omaroo was; "I think it'd be a ripper idea personally."

I do think it is a good idea, but I just had some basic and legitimate questions here. The problem IMO I see here is that the word "contribution" does not necessarily equate equally to underlying "motive of purpose" or towards "issues of ownership."

Not stating such things often lead to deep misunderstandings and real problems down the track! (Personal experience many, many times. I.e. If you are sued for, say, printing an copyrighted image, then whom or who is liable?)

Really, is offering frank statements or questions (even if they are appearing "negatively") really so against the adopted TOS here? Also disagreeing or asking questions does not always mean to being either necessarily negative or "causing trouble" - even above the fears of some arbitrary deletion!

I do think it is a good idea. :thumbsup: Sadly, logistics are usually not so clear cut. :sadeyes:

[Omaroo]

For Gawd's sake.

When a "contributor" supplies an image they will give their express permission for us to include that image within the publication under standard copyright protection law - otherwise it doesn't go in. Simple. Mention is made of the fact that permission has been sought, and it's the way major publications do it - I know - I produce them. Why are you making this so damn difficult? It's a simple process and a simple publication. With all respect, please stop making it into a mountain! All members here want to see is their image in print. Sheesh! :rolleyes: I'm not sure who you're trying to protect!

[Enchilada]

As long as that is expressly said and understood, well fair enough.

Note: If I write an article for, say for AS&T, all the material becomes the property of the company's publisher. You have already importantly said (earlier thread); "Contributors would be listed and declared as copywrite owners of their own images." If this is true, there would not be a problem. (It means they could re-use the images again as they wished.)

Note 2: I was once caught-out in publishing some material elsewhere, then lost the ability to use some of it later for another purpose. I found out they then owned it! They too said it wasn't a problem, it ended being a frustrating legalistic one. Once bitten, twice shy; as they say!

[iceman]

Andrew you just said that Chris stated in the earlier thread "Contributors would be listed and declared as copywrite owners of their own images.".

That solves the problem. Why the need to continue to ask the same questions?

There's no issue here. It's no different than submitting any image to be published on the IIS website - of course the copyright remains with the author.

Chris, who has worked in pre-publishing for a long time, and me, as site owner and web publisher for 5 years, know what all the potential issues and logistics are, so please, enough.

If you have any further questions about it, I'm sure you can PM myself or Chris.

[Omaroo]

A commercial publisher.... IIS is not, Andrew. I doubt that contributors to this little community coffee table book ill find themselves subject to the same contractual arrangements they enter into (knowingly or not) when having their work included in a commercial publication.

I don't think that this is an appropriate conversation to be having within this thread. If you'd like to offer your input could you go to the original discussion thread instead please.

[Octane]

lol.

Whilst we're at it, can we implement microfiche steganographic technology into the design? So, like, on one star per page, is embedded copyright information? :P :lol:

Regards,
Humayun

[Jen]

:D i give you guys permission to put my name in purple text :lol::lol::lol:

Go for it Chris i would love to have an IIS book/mag :P
:thumbsup:

[Enchilada]

Actually. Looking at the images available in the site and the quality of the imagers producing them, such a book would be an attractive addition to any coffee table.
I had a look at an old photographic book by Hans Vehrenberg "Atlas of Deep Sky Splendors" and I am still impressed with the images taken more than thirty-odd years ago. What is great is the images, but also the little inserts showing the places and the boundaries of the featured objects. I probably learned more about the intimates of deep-sky objects than anything else - especially in wide-field images with many multiple types of objects.

Other than the minor issues I've previously brought up the idea is a good one, and I completely agree it would usefully highlight the so many wonderful quality imagers here. Their pics deserve more exposure. If is has good quality glossy paper - I'd buy one!

Pity the person who will have to sort out which ones to choose from the gambit available. I don't envy them! :eyepop:

Note: As a comment, an "Almanac" IMO is not quite appropriate. Perhaps something more like, say, a "Image Atlas" or "A Photographic Register of the Southern Skies." might be a bit more suitable?

[mill]

I am completely pro almanac and would send in some images.
That is a splendid idea Chris :thumbsup:

[Omaroo]

That's the whole point Andrew - image selection is up to the individual contributors. They supply their best or favourite image and maybe one or two of their setup. All I'm going to do with these is put them through a stringent preflight (QA) process that will ensure that they are mechanically suitable to the task at hand. If they are not - I'll reject them and ask for another. Image resolution is only part of the list of requirements of an image. RGB colour balance is WAY different to that of CMYK - which is the colour model we print with.

[ausastronomer]

I agree with Andrew James thoughts.

I think the images should be contributed by IIS members, free of charge. An annual calendar produced that contains the images chosen, plus all the relevant astronomical and emphemeris data for that year included and the calendars sold to help fund the IIS website. It could even be run as an annual astrophotography competition, with the best 12 images chosen across several categories included in the calendar. A couple of sponsors should be able to be found to provide prizes to a couple of the winning entries. I am not into profit going back to AMATEUR astrophotographers and if I thought the proceeds were going back to the imagers, I wouldn't buy the calendar. I would happily pay up to $100 or so for an annual calendar, if I KNEW it was going to help fund this website.

Cheers,
John B

[Enchilada]

Agreed. I use a simple program called iCalamus by invers Software. This does useful layout designs for publishing and colour balancing in CMYK, and is at least so much cheaper than QuarkXPress (some basic experience) or Adobe InDesign.
Happy to volunteer in regards any general outline or design work questions. :thumbsup:

[RobF]

Sounds intriguing. Happy to contribute and will watch this space. Sounds like some of you have fascinating jobs in the publishing world too.

[Omaroo]

Thanks Andrew, I appreciate the offer but I'm in the business - it's what I've done professionally for 20 years. I develop publishing colour workflow solutions for major magazine and newspaper publishers.

I'll apply 3DAP-compliant profiles and separate images in Photoshop.

[Tandum]

Chris, Any idea on a time frame to publish? I'm thinking ideal Xmas presents.

[Enchilada]

Tough audience. When I made my first comment here, I asked two simple questions. "Will this "calendar" have astronomical data too? What will/ should it have?" and "Furthermore, is it made for profit??"
Since then, all I've been is on the defensive.
When I first wrote this I had no idea of Chris' qualifications nor experience in the publishing field. (I too have some experience with graphic design and colour balancing of images for publication.)
Really, if you want some contributions (other than images) all I've said is I'd be happy to help. I.e. Planetary ephemeris data for an Almanac (which now seems not to be your purpose?)

[Omaroo]

Not sure Robin :shrug: I guess we're still exploring its viability. I think that it really might all hinge on the number of pages we decide to produce as this will determine the end-user price per unit. We need more people to indicate what their intentions are so that we have a decent sample space to work with. If everything went ahead quite soon, it really wouldn't be a huge job to create the artwork. Several weeks of spare time maybe?

[multiweb]

Any contributions would be welcome I'd assume. Andrew would have a wealth of data to contribute if Chris and others can manage to add to the publications. Pretty pictures with a bit of Planetary ephemeris and other goodies would be a good combo too. :thumbsup:

[Kevnool]

I would buy a copy of this.
Great idea Chris.
Go for it.
Although i,m not into astrophotography the concept is great.
Cheers Kev.

[Omaroo]

32 contributors to date - and that'd make a 40-odd page book.

More to roll in over the next couple of weeks I'll bet. :thumbsup:

[Alchemy]

you will probably get half the i dont know yet voters too.

[Kevnool]

Chris when you need the cash i,ll pay with paypal its the easist.
Cheers Kev.

[Omaroo]

Whoa Nelly!! :lol: :thumbsup: Thanks for the vote of confidence Kev, but we're still in preliminary concept evaluation stage! :D:D:D

I guess that if it does get off the ground, Mike would provide some mechanism via which to purchase copies - much like he uses to take IISAC and beanie payments - which include (if I'm not mistaken) PayPal.

Watch this space! :)

[Jen]

Im watching this space :D

[Omaroo]

Have we reached the limit in terms of numbers of people willing or 'willing but not yet'?

Mike did you have a plan to email everyone in an effort to reach those that may not have seen this thread?

[iceman]

Hi Chris

I'm just working on a few articles that people have submitted and after I've done (and uploaded) those, I'll be sending out an email and will direct them to this thread.

So will be a few more days, sorry. Been flatout last couple of weeks :(

[Omaroo]

Of course Mike - take your time. :)

[Quark]

Hi Chris,

Sounds like a good idea and I would contribute some of my Saturn storm and Titan transit images, if they were deemed worthy.

Cheers
Trevor

[Big Dave]

Let me know if I can help out- good idea Cris.

[Omaroo]

Cheers Trevor

Actually, you raise a point that must be discussed. Do we need to impose a base-line quality standard on images supplied, or do we just print what we get as someones "best" image, as long as it is mechanically suitable for press (i.e adequate resolution)?

I tend to bend toward the latter. I don't think that anyone should have to compete with the quality that others are able to produce. If a shot is someones best shot - then so it should be treated as just that, and included for that very reason.

So - I think that everyone should be able to make up their own mind as to whether or not a shot they've produced with their own equipment is good enough to sit alongside other images in the same book - some of which will be world-beating. There will be no competition, and I'd like to suggest that images are presented in authors name order.

[Omaroo]

Cheers Trevor and Dave :)

Thanks to Ben, we may have sourced a supplier (well, a relative!) with an Indigo digital press :) All we need now are reliable numbers, and we'll organise a quote based on these. :thumbsup:

[Octane]

Chris,

Here's a thought. I know that typically planetary images are very low resolution compared to their cousins -- the DSLRs and dedicated CCDs of the world, and so may cause a few issues with print quality (if being blown up). With that in mind, it may be an idea that planetary imagers submit multiple/different images (to form a mosaic) to make up for "one" DSLR/CCD image, as it were.

Of course, if they were happy to just have the one image in the middle of the page, surrounded by black or white or grey, or any other neutral tone/colour which would still allow you to see detail and contrast in their image, then, that would be a goer, too.

Just a thought.

Regards,
Humayun

[Omaroo]

These are very valid points Humayun. The Indigo digital press utilizes liquid electro photography (LEP) to create offset and photo quality prints. I'm going to be talking to the printer in order to get their recommendation as to what we need to supply in terms of minimum resolution given the variable quality levels the press is able to output. If we were to emulate magazine quality, which is usually produced by laying down a 4-colour CMYK rosette pattern on paper in a web offset press at a line screen of 200lpi, we need to apply the rule of thumb which states that in order to support that print line screen we need to offer images at 1.5-2.5 times that line screen in actual image resolution terms. Therefore I'd be looking at a minimum resolution off 300dpi. For an 8 inch (200mm) trim size, that equates to images that will need to be at least 2,400 pixels wide to span the entire page panel on one side.

So... you're right. Planetary images are usually produced by webcam-style devices at resolutions typically ranging from 640 (in x) to 1024. So - a planetary imager might give us a selection of four images to work with and we can tile them as you say. BUT - there's nothing to say that we can't scale an image up and present it under-resolved. We can artificially increase its resolution in Photoshop (an absolute no-no in the advertising industry...LOL!) and look forward to a large planet like Saturn or Jupiter on the page, but lookin' a tad fuzzy! :thumbsup:

Anyway... I'll issue a set of guidlines, and people can make up their own minds as to whether an image they intend to include is going to have to be artificially scaled or placed in a tile arrangement with a few others. You see plenty of planetary images that Mike, Anthony, Paul and others produce that look mighty fine in AS&T :)

[Paul Haese]

Couple of things that I am curious about?

In the case where you get a lot of contributors; who selects which images are used? Obviously if you got over 100 contributors you would need to start thinning out the contributors. The selection process could lead to someone being offended.

And, what happens if you get a glut of contributors from one part of imaging, say for instance planetary imaging or a deep sky object that is the same? There are a lot of people doing that and I can see some might get offended if they are not published. Or is the idea that all the contributors will be published?

[Omaroo]

Every imager will choose their own single favourite image Paul, and all contributions will be used. This book isn't necessarily about the images perse, it's about the imagers. Everyone gets to enter their own favourite. If we get two M42's then we'll ask both imagers if they could have an alternative that they might want to contribute, but if not then that's fine too. At least we'll offer them that courtesy. Both images will likely be different anyway. Planetary imagers don't have many planets to realistically choose from, so we're bound to get a few Jupiters and Saturns - and moons.

The idea is that we present the "imager" on a page, along with a photo of themselves or their rig (or both) and their favourite image that they've taken. Depending on the price, we'll limit the impending page count up front (like 66 pages for example), so the first 66 imagers to contribute after we open the gates will be printed in the book, and anyone after that will be first in line for next time. I'd keep a count displayed so people are aware.

[Paul Haese]

Thanks Chris.

[marc4darkskies]

Based on the discussion so far it appears to be moving towards being a simple directory of Australian astrophotographers. Not exactly a bad thing at all, but not necessarily something people will pay $60+ for. Unless you're going to make it a "best of" type book, there needs to be some other angle to grab peoples interest. Anyway, most folks who want to know who's who in the australian astrophotography community will be googling or browsing IIS to find them, and typically those imagers will have a web presence already. So what in this book will make someone want to spend $60+?

Moreover, when I browse a $60+ picture book, I want to go oooo aaaaah, not hoooo huuuum. That means, whether you like it or not, you're going to have to exert some editorial control over the quality of content ... to make the book attractive enough for people to want to spend their hard earned $$ on. Basing content on the altruistic notion of printing anything anyone gives you (because you're afraid of offending someone?) on a first in best dressed basis won't work IMHO. Yep, you'd probably end up with a committee of people deciding what's in and what's out. :scared:.

Wanna know what I think? :D Why not have an area in IIS that functions like what you're proposing and has a picture book feel about it? You could have bios, images and links that illustrate every person who images in Australia (and who wants to be publicised). Mike doesn't have much on - I'm sure he'd build something pretty quickly - call it a top 100 list of Australian astro-photographers ... eh Mike? :)

Just my 2c.

Cheers, Marcus

[Jen]

Well thats an easy pic for me so far i have only one pic of the moon
(but weather its good enough for the book or not is a different thing :lol:)

Unless there is an afocal section in the book count mine in :thumbsup::thumbsup:
:D

[Omaroo]

Whilst you're of course entitled to it, I think that's a dissapointing view Marcus.

I'm not sure of how many $60, well presented coffee table books you've picked up over the past few years that you could show to your friends and say, "I'm in there - and so are the people I spend time with on IIS". If you want a book that you can "ooohh" and "aaaaah" to, maybe go your favourite book store and spend the same money on a book that is just..well.. another book. There are a plethora of very expensive and beautifully printed and produced titles to choose from, but none will have yours or my images in them. I see the book being bought mostly by the actual image contributors, but I'm positive that there are plenty of other wonderful non-imaging people here on IIS that would love to have a copy as well.

I don't think that there needs to be any other angle -at all. Most people haven't had their photography published before - so here's their chance. There's an enormous sense of pride to see your efforts immortalised on paper, and moreso in a beautiful book. A book like this is just, as Mike has stated before, a visual feast and that's all it's meant to be. It's not the best of - in order. It's better than that.

$60 for what is essentially a very specific and personalised book of the people here and their images is pittance. It really is. The whole point of this is to be able to produce a "thing" that you can pick up, feel, and be proud of. All of the images may not all be the best in the world - but the people who took them and are presenting them in their own book are. We're all doing something unselfish here, by each making the effort to spend time (for no collective profit to speak of), on what is going to be a long and complex exercise to produce something absolutely unique. You can't put a website on your coffee table or on your bookshelf. You can't give a URL to your granddad for his birthday.



As far as appointing a committee to "decide" who's in and who's out - maybe you've missed the point. There will be no committee and no competition. I'm donating my own time to organise the collection and carry out the design work. Gratis. Free. It's something I love doing, it's something I'm pretty good at, and for the moment I have the spare capacity to do it. These people here are my friends and I'm proud to be able to contribute in my own way to the sense of community we have here.

People will sensibly provide their best or favourite image of their own free will, and will be able to judge whether they want their image in or not based on how they think it may appear next to all the others. There will be no base-line "wow factor" measure. If it's someones' best image then that's what it is. I'm pleased to be able to print it for them as long as its mechanically acceptable for the task - i.e. is of a suitable resolution to support a 200 line screen at the size printed(200mmx200mm). No-one with a "better" image is going to miss out because a lesser image made it in before theirs. The size of the book will be determined by what I recieve, nothing more, nothing less. If the total pages push the price up a bit then we'll probably not have as many people buying. We can't help that other than to try and find the best and cheapest digital printer we can. Thankfully Ben's (a member here) father runs an Indigo digital press, so we're looking good.

So far, the gathering of statistics has shown that we'll probably end up with fifty to sixty imagers contributing this time around - which determines the size and therefore direct cost of production. That's not exactly a "flood" of people that we'd otherwise have to cull from. This isn't about the images perse, it's about the people. There - I've said it again. It's designed to be a collection of images from people who've provided the best they can given their level of experience, money, time and equipment. I've produced images that I'm just as proud of as Peter Ward is of his own. Peters are way better than mine, and would cream mine in a comp, but that doesn't make me any less proud of mine. The book is essentially a snap-shot in time. Those that were here at this particular time and contributed an image will have something they can keep forever. Those that are happy enough to mill about on a website won't.

If anyone prefers not to have one, then that's their own call I guess! :) Sixty dollars is only a number thats been bandied about in lieu of having real production costs finalised yet. It may be more, it may be less. So far, as of today, seventy seven people have indicated (up front - I suspect more when it becomes available) that they'd buy the book. Six of them would even pay $100 or more. I'm one of them. Thirty eight people have potentially committed to contributing with sixteen more being undecided. That's fifty four. A page each, and a couple of intro pages and an index at the back, that's a sixty page book. That isn't insignificant, and is actually an affordable thing to produce and make available to people. Being short run (maybe hundreds over time), it's a more expensive way of producing printed material if you look at the per unit cost - but at least we'll have it, and as more are required we simply order more in small bundles! To print it traditionally on a sheet-fed offset press we'd never be able to even contemplate it as large print runs would be required in order for a printer to even contemplate printing it - for which someone would have to pay thousands of dollars up-front. It's untenable. We'd be forced to look at impersonal and quite frankly boring websites forever.

[BerrieK]

My 2cents, for what it is worth; My understanding and 'feel' for this project is that it is not a commercial endeavour aimed at making profit, but rather a book created by and for members of a forum with a common interest. To look at and enjoy, and to share their own passion with family and friends. Not to advertise the who's who in astrophotography. There is a whole wider world out there for that!! Inclusion in order to avoid offence is not an option - inclusion as a valuable member of the forum / group, at whatever level of 'amateur' or otherwise ability they sit at, is essential.

I am not an imager, indeed I can hardly even class myself as a beginner or newby visual user with my basic skills and knowledge; I confess that I have saved many astro pics from the web and indeed pinched from this site, put them on a data card, and have them cycling though on a digital photo frame in my lounge room. Although I understand the points you make Markus, the book is for members to enjoy and be proud of; I would love to be able to show people why I love this hobby in a book that they can hold and feel comprising of images from members of this forum, irrespsective of whether they are award winning images or not; from little things big things grow (or so the song goes anyway), so why not encourage people to start small rather than poo poo beginners.

Kerrie :)

[end girly rant]

[marc4darkskies]

My comments dissappoint you Chris?! I've learned over many years in the corporate environment that opinions are just that - they should be given and received without fear or favour, unemotionally and honestly. I'm merely contributing to a discussion.

My views obviously have a commercial slant and assumed your market was ultimately the wider community. When I look at things like this I think of target market, how to make a product attractive to that market and whether the proportion of that market that might buy your product will cover costs. I see now that this is not particularly relevant to you as you're aiming to produce a keepsake for a handfull of IIS community members who want to see their images in print. You're preaching to the converted so to speak.

Personally, I don't need to see my images in print - that's not why I (or most other people in the IIS community) are in the hobby. I DO want to share my journey though, and my web presence is how I show family and friends (and anyone who stumbles over the site via google or IIS) the beauty of the night sky. Of course I'd be proud (one day) to have an image chosen on merit to be displayed in a commercial publication, but having my friends call me after looking at my web page and say wow what a great picture and then ask me about it is much more fulfilling.

BTW, I print my own images and plaster them all over my walls!! :) I also give prints away to friends and family who want them.

Good luck with your venture (very sincerely)!

Cheers, Marcus

[Omaroo]

Marcus - there's no commercial slant on this project. Costs are borne by an individual ordering a book - one at a time, as that is the beauty of printing it digitally. There was never (as far as I know) a plan to decide to produce or not produce this thing based on whether we're able to sell it to individuals outside of this small community. Doing it the way we are, no one will ever need to carry a large debt that needs to be recovered - the success of which would hinge on its saleability. If that were the case then commercial sensibilities and considerations would of course have to come into play. Being in the publishing business I understand that better than most. ;) It's tough out there in publishing land right now. If other people that stumble on to IIS see it and wish to order a copy then great - we'd be happy to organise them a copy in the next batch order to the printer.

I had hoped that the discussion over whether it should or should not be produced had long passed. I think we've received enough positive response to be able to make a book.

You've said that you'll not be one of the contributors and that's really OK! It's up to everone to decide that they may or may not want to be involved. We're not discussing whether the time spent on designing and producing a small book might be better spent on a website as that's not what we're trying to do in this instance. If you prefer website presentation for your best image then go for it! :) I also like your idea of a centralised web repository for the best of the best. Maybe that's something you might want to help put together for everyone.

Thanks for the good luck - it's appreciated! :)

[marc4darkskies]

I knew it was non profit Kerrie. What I wasn't quite understanding is that people would pay $60 to see there own work in print. Also, like I said at the outset, having a directory of australian imagers is not a bad idea at all. I was just wondering how the concept would be carried out without losing money, but Chris seems to have that sussed! I'm happy to contribute as well ... I just don't need to buy the book - I can see who's who by participating in IIS and other forums & sites.



Nice idea - may do that myself!



Waaa? - did someone denegrate beginners in some way?! ... let me at 'em!!! I was one for 35 years - talk about s l o w !! :)

Cheers, Marcus

[multiweb]

Marcus, I reckon you just have to look at it for what it is. No competition, no standard just one of your favorite pics printed in a home made publication along with others. No more no less. It's your choice to be in it or not. I don't care if nobody wants to buy it. They don't have to even look at it. I'd buy a copy straight away even if they just print one. :)

[Alchemy]

better change my vote of uncertain to a yes... that means id buy one too.

i look forward to seeing all the imagers and their gear, im not keen on putting my face on the worldwide web or many of my personal details, but in a limted production among those who i have communicated with for sometime now , its ok.


clive

[Omaroo]

LOL! Very good Clive. Welcome aboard! :)

I'll be asking for two images of everyone - a main image at full size and resoltion, and a second one which can be anything they like - their scope, observatory or mug!

[stephenb]

Just a couple of questions please?

1. Will a "technical lower limit" be set on the applicant? Being a general, community forum which many beginners gravitate to, there will be many beginners who dabble in imaging may not be considered as good as the more popular members on this forum, so will they be allowed to publish something? or will the successful applicants to this book be the regular middle- and upper-level imagers with all the top gear?

2. Have you established approximately how many imagers will be featured?

3. Reading more about the images rather than the actual imagers would be more interesting to the wider community/reader, IMO.

hoo roo,

Stephen

[jjjnettie]

:lol:So when do we start to inundate you with images Chris?

[Omaroo]

Hi Stephen :) I think that we've probably discussed these before, but that's no prob!



There will be no "lower limit" of any sort applied to the images entered apart from pure mechanical suitability - i.e. resolution must be of a certain level to print properly. I'll advise you on this and how to check for it in due course. There is absolutely no way that people are going to miss out because their images aren't ready for the Malin Awards! LOL We're encouraging imagers of ALL levels to contribute - it certainly isn't a competition! :) We want the best that YOU can produce given your level of experience and equipment.



I think that we're looking at around fifty to sixty at this stage. Maybe more if we get people excited enough! :thumbsup:



We'll include the follwing basic information on each imaged object:

Common name, catalog designation, constellation, RA/Dec, magnitude/surface brightness, date/time captured.

Following that, we'll include a brief description of the capture and processing technique, along with a word on the equipment used next to a photo of you/rig or both.

Considering that we're allocating one page per imager, we want to keep it tidy and uncluttered.



Hoo Roo!

[Omaroo]

Things are progressing well Jeanette :) I'd say sooner than later. We just need to establish some ground rules regarding mechanical quality control, and a method of collection. Stay tuned! :)

[Octane]

I'll just add that if anyone hasn't seen what a photo looks like printed in a high-quality book, they don't know what they're missing out on. Especially if it's /your/ own hard work. Beginner or advanced -- there's nothing like holding the actual final destination artifact and enjoying it for what it is, a work of art. Let's face it, viewing images on screen is pretty crap as it is totally dependent on the resolution of your screen and its ability to convey colours that are true to life.

I get a lot of joy out of seeing my own images (landscape/astro) in large format print and can't wait to see what they (along with everyone else's) look like in this book.

Thank you so much Chris for going to all the trouble to organise this. Two Megan Fox thumbs. :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

Regards,
Humayun

[Tandum]

Chris, I have an unlimited website on a huge pipe with FTP access if needed. After reading Humayun's input I would'nt mind throwing in an image as well.

[Omaroo]

Cheers Robin - we'll keep that in mind, thanks! :)

[Phil]

So i will be in on this where do we send the image. Sounds like a great idea.
Phil

[Omaroo]

Stay tuned Phil - details will be posted in a new thread. :)

[Omaroo]

OK everyone - an announcement is coming in the next couple of days. I'm going to put together a description of how I'll need submitted images formatted, what sizes they'll need to be and how you'll get them to me for pagination. For those that already know how to format material to support a 200-line screen 4-colour press - the books trim dimensions will be 200x200 - so go from there. For those that don't, I'll explain in simple language over the next couple of days.

Looks like we're committing to an 80-pager, and I think you'll be happy with the price when we announce it. That will be announced soon, and Mike will go into how that side of it is going to work. It will be soft cover (250gsm heavy stock) and 120gsm matte stock inside. One page each - with a main image and sub image being whatever you like - either yourself, your rig or both. This will be accompanied by a short blurb (we'll set a word limit) describing the image, the basic equipment and process and a little on yourself/rig.

Looks like we're off! :thumbsup:

[RobF]

Can't wait to hear more. Thanks Chris for investing so much time and thought in this baby. I'm enjoying the technical descriptions of what's required to get something like this off the ground too. Way outside my usual line or work. :thumbsup:

[Big Dave]

Thanks for putting in the effort Cris.

[Alchemy]

excellent.....

thats what i need.

[Jen]

woohooo
:clap::clap:
good stuff Chris :thumbsup:
:D

[RB]

Excellent stuff Chris, looking forward to it !

[alan meehan]

THANKS Chris cant wait to see this book go ahead
cheers ALAN

[Omaroo]

29th Aug - OK everyone - I have, after several days, only 9 submissions! From the survey, 47 indicated that they'd contribute and 16 were sitting on the fence. That makes 63 possible submissions.

If I could ask you to get cracking and send in your work I'd love to include it :) Details on how and where to are in the following post: http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=48708

Cheers :thumbsup:
Chris

[jjjnettie]

I'll get mine to you as soon as possible Chris.
Hopefully tonight OK.

[Omaroo]

Thanks Jeanette - looking forward to it! :)

[RB]

Yep I'll send mine in too as soon as I get a chance Chris.

:thumbsup:

[Alchemy]

processed arranged and burned mine to disk, will post next week...... i'm in:)

clive

[Omaroo]

Thanks Andrew & Clive :thumbsup:

[Quark]

Hi Chris,

Sent mine in as email attachments yesterday.

Regards
Trevor

[Omaroo]

Yep - got those Trevor - thanks! :)

[h0ughy]

just trying to choose what to put in, and of course an appropriate image of me - which i dont have, unless someone else took one of me?

[erick]

Half done :)

[Jen]

Well im still trying to work out how to get the size etc.. right to email :whistle:
Thats if you dont mind having a boring afocal shot of the moon in the mag among all that brilliance :lol:

[erick]

Don't need to email it Jen - upload using ftp to Chris' server - can be a BIG file - no problem - just takes a little time.

[erick]

All done! :thumbsup:

[Omaroo]

Cheers Eric :) Got it.

[Liz]

Mine is there now too Chris ... with some help from Eric :)

[kinetic]

I'm in too......sent :thumbsup:

Steve

[jjjnettie]

David, I'll see what I have on my camera. Haven't downloaded any photos off it yet.

[mill]

Ok mine is done :)

[Omaroo]

Cheers Martin - got it.

No photo of your rig or self yet? That's the deal! LOL! :thumbsup:

[mill]

Aha!! The photo of my rig is already in the main photo :)
Unless you want them all seperate.
In that case i can upload them both seperate.
Cheers Martin.

[jjjnettie]

Here you go Mr Moderator Sir.:)

[Omaroo]

Cheers Martin - if you could separate them that'd be better as I won't know what side I need it on until I know what page you'll fall on. I'm also sizing them all the same from page to page, so need to be able to scale them separately. Sorry to do that to you... :doh:

[mill]

Ok all done again but seperate.

[Omaroo]

Chars :)

[Omaroo]

We now have 14 contributors who have uploaded their material - thanks guys.

We need...ohhh.. about another 60. Come on everyone! :)

[multiweb]

Sorry mate - totally forgot about it. I'll get cracking. :whistle:

[Omaroo]

I have 20 (excluding myself) contributors so far.

h0ughy - your images are truncated, so I'll need you to resupply unfortunately. I'll tell you whch in a PM.

Looking good already. Make sure you get your material to me asap if you want to appear! :)

The attached page collage gives you a good idea of who has supplied what to date. As I keep on saying, please don't hesitate to send your best image in - no matter what it's of. I'll put it up the other end away from any similar image/s placed so far. They're all different, so that's absolutely fine. I'll create a collage every 16 pages to let you know what I've recieved. Hopefully this collage will give those sitting on the fence a reason to hop off and contribute! :lol:

[Jen]

:eyepop: wow Chris it looks amazing
Cant wait till its finished :thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:
I better get a move along with my pic i dont wanna miss out, ;) cant leave out the PURPLE Jen :D:P

[Omaroo]

Better get a move on! :thumbsup::lol:

Purple....hmm.... just for you Jen. :D It'll be a talking point.

[danielsun]

Would love to be in it and so far it's looking great!


Cheers Daniel.

[h0ughy]

what? i dont understand? Ok do as i am told:shrug:

[turbo_pascale]

if we come up short on pics, can we entertain extra submissions from existing contributors? pretty please?

Turbo

[Jen]

:lol::lol::lol::lol:
:D your da man Chris :thumbsup:

[Omaroo]

Updated mosaic... that's 26.

Please don't take these as finals - I have much yet to do in order to determine what page side a contributors image set may fall on - so I'm yet to know where your insert images are to be placed properly.

[Liz]

That looks stunning Chris!!!!!!! :thumbsup::thumbsup:

[Omaroo]

Thanks Liz :)

I'm kind of sitting here twiddling the thumbs a bit waiting for more people to send in their work. Guys??? :shrug:

[jjjnettie]

I'm working on it Chris.
Can't get rid of the gradient on my LMC image. And I do want it to be as perfect as possible. Maybe I should give you a couple of smaller pics to place over the affected area.
Then there's the self portrait of me and my toys....
Ok, I'll get right onto it boss.

[jjjnettie]

Self portrait done. (yuk, do I really look like that?)

[erick]

Don't know, I haven't seen you in the ... ahem ... flesh :)

But a nice shot, if you are referring to your new avatar. :thumbsup:

[TrevorW]

Did anyone have a problem uploading the file I'm using a computer at work and can't connect to Chris's FTP server

[jjjnettie]

No, not the avatar (thanks anyway), but the self portrait with my 2 scopes.

[Omaroo]

Try again guys... I believe that the server had a bunch of persistent connections running from people who hadn't logged out, and it was denying new ones. I've just flushed any oldies, so it should be good. When you're finished, if you could log out I'd appreciate it :)

[jjjnettie]

It helps if you spell the host name correctly.:doh:
I think I sent my files. Not sure though.

[jjjnettie]

Ahhhh, now they're on their way.
My internet connection is soooo slooowww.

[Omaroo]

Excellent Jeanette! Youse "done good"! :) :thumbsup: Thanks!

[jjjnettie]

Yer welcome Chris.;)

[Omaroo]

Now with extra jjjnettieness :thumbsup:

[DavidU]

Thats comming up a treat Chris !

[jjjnettie]

Hi Chris,
I know you're probably very busy, but..... could you send me a low res copy of my page.
Pretty please.
cs
nettie

[bmitchell82]

Im up for sending in a image set im still very much learning (started march this year) though i belive that i have taken a few shots that are worthy let me know if you would like me to forward anything on to you.

[Omaroo]

Of course Brendan - it's open to absolutely everyone. :thumbsup: Just follow the instructions in the sticky thread.

[Omaroo]

28 pages...

If anyone wishes to contribute another Eta Carinae, could it be either extra-wide or narrow field? Ta! :thumbsup:

[TrevorW]

Chris

Was the picture of the scope too big and my photo too small. I don't actually have one of me taken with my gear

Come on guys get your photo's in there we've got 6000 members and a lot of talent

Cheers

[RobF]

Perhaps a PM to all members, or a post in the 3 imaging forums to remind people that haven't followed the Compendium thread?

Hats off you to again Chris for the commitment and drive to get this whole project going....! :)

[Omaroo]

LOL! - No Trevor, it was fine. When I put these previews up, they're simply a snapshot of where I'm at, that's all. They will constantly change until page numbers are finalised, which means that insert images will shift to the RHS on right-hand pages when I know which ones they'll be. I have to watch that I don't have similar objects too close to each other throughout the book, so everything will be shifting right up until the end.

[Omaroo]

Cheers Rob - and thanks :) It's lots of fun. :thumbsup:

[jjjnettie]

:cool: And keep it going.

[Omaroo]

30 pages - thanks Clive (alchemy) and Leon! :)

[Omaroo]

7 days to go everyone...... :D

At this stage, we don't have a book yet - we need at least 70-75 images and only have 30. Please contribute! :hi:

[stephenb]

This is turning out to be a fantastic project. I hope to have something of worth soon, but regardless, I look forward to buying this little gem of a book. Well done Chris and to all the contributors.

[Jen]

:eyepop: 7 days to go :eyepop:

[Darth Wader]

I'd love to be able to contribute, but I don't think a pic of the waxing gibbous moon taken with a Canon Ixus through a 15mm eyepiece quite makes the grade:lol::lol::lol:

[mill]

Just hope another 40 photo's or drawing will pop up or else it might as well be a 31 day calendar :rofl::rofl::rofl:

[mill]

Anything is good Wade, anything.
It is about what you think is good and NOT what others think is good or good enough.

Hey Jen i did some pink ;)

[Jen]

Woohoooo looks pretty :thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:
:D

[Omaroo]

31-up. Thanks go to Vincent (cookie8) for his magnificent moon, Venus & Jupiter trails over the Nepean. :thumbsup:

[Omaroo]

Here's the latest - thanks Stuart (beren), Stephen (glenluceskies), Louie (atalas), Doug (dugnsuz) and Peter (PeterL)!

[Omaroo]

Jen - yours is up. Nice in purple :) Doesn't show well in the thumbnail, so trust me - it's .... so you! :lol:

[h0ughy]

LOl i can just make that out Chris - Very Sad. How many to go until we have the book?:shrug:

[Omaroo]

We're half way there David. I need another 40 or so, 35 at a pinch. :sadeyes:

[multiweb]

Chris, if you're short in pic submissions and if it comes to worse you could have some of the people who already submitted adding another one to fill in. But you'll still need to sell the numbers though to make it viable for print. Having said that I'm pretty confident some people will buy more than one. I want two for sure. :thumbsup:

[Omaroo]

Yes Marc.... I'm still to see anything from the "wigs".... :whistle:

[multiweb]

Need to shake harder ;)

[Jen]

:lol::lol::lol: Wooohooooo thanks Chris your the best :thumbsup::thumbsup:
:D:D

[Omaroo]

You're welcome Jen. :thumbsup: Did you catch the little surprise in the one I sent to you? :whistle:

[Jen]

:lol::lol::lol: hehe yes i did Chris the purple on black looks awsome :thumbsup::thumbsup:
:D

[Omaroo]

Hmm... no, you didn't then.

Zoom in to 250% or so...... :whistle:

[stephenb]

Like hidden Easter eggs on DVD's, Chris? There's an idea!

[Jen]

:):):):):):)
:eyepop:
:hi: :hi: :hi: :hi:


awwwwwwwww thanks Chris i got a smiley face even wooohooooo

:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

:thanks::thanks:
:cheers:
:D

[Omaroo]

LOL! Too funny... :)

[Jen]

hehe yeah very cute :) yep it is so me ;):whistle:
:lol::lol: