Is it cheating when..

[prova]

I do the all the work of capturing the data but then handing the raw file to someone else much more experienced to process for me?

I'm a little colour-blind and sometimes this doesn't help my processing skills and the fact that if someone else can't get more out of my image than I can, why not?

Keen to hear some opinions..

[bojan]

What cheating ???? :-)

[Lester]

Some of the top astro images of the world are taken by one or more using different telescopes and processed by a specalist.

Its not cheating. Just handing over to someone with skill in the processing area.

Wish I could do that and save many hours processing.

All the best.

[Dennis]

If I were in your position, I would just write image acquired by “me” (actually you!) and processed by ANO. Collaboration is a beneficial process and I do not see it as cheating.

Where you have the technical skills and capability to set up your gear, configure it, drive it, capture the data and all the necessary calibration/reduction frames but then for whatever reason you do no process that data, asking someone else with the necessary skills to do the post capture processing does not constitute cheating in my book.

Cheers

Dennis

[prova]

Thanks for the input, and Dennis I do like the idea of mentioning both parties eg. image by and processing by..

Now to find someone who will happily process my images whilst being paid in Monopoly money!

[leon]

This could be a business venture for some very skilled people, I'd be in it for sure, if you think about it most of us have being doing it forever when digital capture didn't exist and we sent our exposed film off to the labs.

Leon

[jase (Jason)]

Some would call it cheating if you enter the image into a competition...similar to the recent "not all your own work" discussions surrounding CWAS DM awards. Personally, this goes on all the time in both pro and amateur realms. I don't see any issues with it providing credit is provided to the relevant parties involved.

[GrampianStars (Rob)]

G'day
In business it's called "delegating" leaving more time for acquisition of images
besides the missus needs to be involved as she hates being out in the cold

[Matty P (Matt)]

I wouldn't call it cheating but letting someone else process your work is in a way, letting yourself down. Producing your very own image that you have spent a couple of hours on capturing and processing is personally much more rewarding IMO.

Processing is actually my favourite part of producing an image.

[theodog (Jeff)]

To do a good job you need good foundations.
I don't think it's cheating, just teamwork. As long as all are credited.

[Jeffkop (Jeff)]

Well I didnt make my own telescope or mount, ... so If your a cheat .. SO AM I ... but I have designed a combination power supply, heater controller with temperature display and battery charger ... so everything I requires to power it all is in one handy cabinet ... does that count ???

[strongmanmike (Michael)]

Of course it ain't cheating, imaging is imaging and if a colaborative effort is what you want to do go for it, I've done it a few times

The only grey area, as Jase pointed out, might be when it came to entering any such image in a contest. Nooooow you've let the cat amongst the pigeons

Mike

[robgreaves]

There's a chap back in the UK who knows diddly squat about image processing - he just gathers raw data and sends it over to a processing guru in the USA who spends hours (or days) in Photoshop to get the data processed into nice images.

He's now got a coffee-table book of images out, has appeared in UK national newspapers with the images (but somehow failed to mention the guy who does all the hard (real!) work processing his raw data) and has even won a Sony award for 'his' (ahem) images

I'd say "go for it" in your particular situation, particularly your colour blindness, but fairly credit the person who helped you out when you post your images, especially if you feel the need to have them published in a national newspaper

Competition entries might be tricky though, but that's another story

Regards,
Rob

[Babalyon 5]

Originally Posted by GrampianStars

G'day
In business it's called "delegating" leaving more time for acquisition of images
besides the missus needs to be involved as she hates being out in the cold

Same here. We did buy the scope for "us", didnt we dear?

[rally]

I can't see anything wrong with it all, you are not setting out to mislead anyone, just get some nice images of your own data.

It would only cheating if you misrepresented the totality of the work as your own. So a collaborative credit would serve well.

Here is an example of a collaborative effort - these guys seem to do this regularly.
http://www.stargazer-observatory.com/4625-martin.html

Good luck with it

Rally

BTW if you just put your image into an image processing package (or a series of them) and it achieves a particular desired result, does everyone else necessarily credit the author of the software for the use of their processing algorithms !

Its a fine line really.

[Peter Ward]

There are any number of photographic images out there that "capture the moment".

This does not require you built the camera, did the D&P and showcased the image.

Astro-imaging requires a little more....

Polar alignment, focus, composition, framing, guiding (often for hours), data reduction etc. etc... a bit more like cinema!

Oscar winning movies are the result of a collaboration. Sure, being a Spielberg or Jackson helps in "knowing" what might deliver an Oscar.... but to claim this as "all my own work" is a long bow indeed.

If all you want to do is create a great cinema or astro-image...there is no "cheating"

But I'd suggest the resulting image(s) need to acknowledge those that contributed in the credits....

Just my 2 cents worth...

[prova]

Wow surprised to get this many comments, I agree with most of you in saying that it is a collaborative effort and I would have no shame whatsoever to hand over my own acquired data to someone with strong processing skills and at least credit them.

In-fact I hope do so in the near future.