Starship Asterisk*

Jerel wrote:I have never posted a comment before, and I am relatively certain nobody in their right mind would ever read this particular thread all the way to my message, so I'm pretty sure nobody will ever read this post anyway, but..... SHEESH!! Everybody just calm down and get a life! If seeing an actual astronomy picture in "Astronomy Picture of the Day" is the only thing keeping you from ranting on and on and actually never coming back here... you need some therapy, and maybe take a look at your priorities! The picture here is not always about astronomy. Sometimes it's just... something else. Whatever! I use the site as my homepage, so I see this every single time I start my browser, and yeah, a huge bar code is not something I enjoy seeing a zillion times a day, but tomorrow (actually 9PM pacific time) it will be something else, and there are WAY more important things to be upset about if you need to be upset about something. People are starving to death every day, and others are dying from incurable diseases, while still others are out in space doing science. The Astronomy Picture of the Day is pretty far down on the list of things worth getting your panties in a wad. I am grateful for this service and have been a constant viewer for over 10 years. I don't LOVE every picture, but not much in life is fantastic 100% of the time. Deal with it.

zerro1 wrote:Thought I would check back and see what others had to say after my intitial post.

All you people who support the decision to post a bar code... I like you to sit back and listen for a minute..
There is a whole slew of Amature Astro Photographers out there that submit images for consideration to the prestigous honor of being chosen for Astronomy Picture Of The Day. Amature does not mean bad or low quality or lesser than, it simply means we don't collect a pay check for what we do. I'm OK when images I've submitted aren't chosen because someone else has a better submission. In reality, I've probably submitted nothing that is worthy when compared to others fine works.
It might be free for you to link this as your home page and view the winners of the daily selection...But it's not free for me or anyone else that creates these images. There's substantial cost to get started, there is a incredible amount of time that is required to learn the craft, and hone the skills. Many of the images you see submitted by "Us Lowly Amatures" take any where from several hours of data collection to sometimes years to compile enough exposure on a given target. I personally know of one 18 panel narrow band mosaic that was submitted. It took six months for the imager gather all of the data to create that fantastic image and IS certainly worthy.
I'm not saying that every Amature Astronomer gets involved in it so they can be chosen. Not at all. We do it because we love the cosmos, the galaxies, nebulae, starfields, and the challenges we face in taking part in these activities.
So many have poured their hearts into imaging these jewels in our night sky, processed the integrated stacks of multiple imaging sessions, looked at the results and thought...Hmm Maybe this one is good enough to be selected, Maybe?
and there before us is the selection out of all of the possibilities... a bar code!

So you are saying APOD costs you money because you chose to do astrophotography? Rubbish! If you chose astrophotography on the remote chance your image would be selected as an APOD, you probably wasted your money. You may still yet get your image chosen as an APOD (good luck to you), but to imply that APOD is responsible for your expense is beyond ridiculous.

ol1bit wrote:Well,

I wonder if Nasa has any kind of barcodes on space faring craft which might be encounters by aliens at some future Date?

Just think 10 million years from now Voyager 1 & 2 will still be going! Any Alien's who could decrypt English, should be able to do bar codes as well. Any we can store much more uniform information in a 2D barcode (driver's license) than in English. A CD/DVD/Blu Ray might not be readable just because of the technology differences.

zerro1 wrote:That is absolutely NOT what I said!!! I said it's free to link and look at the pictures! It cost a lot of money to get involved in it! I made it very clear that we amatures do it because we love it. Nobody starts this path with the expectation of posting on here. Very few would even think it possible in the early days of their trials in this sink hole of a Hobby! . You want to look at the pretty pictures and go OOH AHH isn't that a wonderful picture? BUT HAVE NO FRICKEN CLUE as to what it takes to create it? keep your head buried in the sand. I got about $3500 in CCD camera's alone with $10,000 total investment. Do I think think that anyone is responsible for that but me?? HECK NO.

Get a Clue Bystander!

... It might be free for you to link this as your home page and view the winners of the daily selection...But it's not free for me or anyone else that creates these images. ...

bystander wrote:

zerro1 wrote:That is absolutely NOT what I said!!! I said it's free to link and look at the pictures! It cost a lot of money to get involved in it! I made it very clear that we amatures do it because we love it. Nobody starts this path with the expectation of posting on here. Very few would even think it possible in the early days of their trials in this sink hole of a Hobby! . You want to look at the pretty pictures and go OOH AHH isn't that a wonderful picture? BUT HAVE NO FRICKEN CLUE as to what it takes to create it? keep your head buried in the sand. I got about $3500 in CCD camera's alone with $10,000 total investment. Do I think think that anyone is responsible for that but me?? HECK NO.

Get a Clue Bystander!

Oh, but it is what you said, or at least implied:

... It might be free for you to link this as your home page and view the winners of the daily selection...But it's not free for me or anyone else that creates these images. ...

As, for me getting a clue, I think I may have a few more than you.

BTW: You might want to get a spell checker for your browser.

star-geezer wrote:I seriously question what in the world the QR Code has to do with astronomy. And how does this apply to the statement at the top of each APOD post that it contains a "brief explanation written by a professional astronomer." Seems to be a gratuitous ad for the Kaywa QR Code Generator.

Whenever I write about politics, religion, or something that is not 100% straight-up science, I get a handful of protests in the comments, usually along the lines of "I came here because this is supposed to be an astronomy blog…".

Well, for the n^th time, I’ll let y’all know: this is primarily a science blog, but not exclusively so. I think people like what I write about astronomy because I add a dimension of humanity to it, since I’m personally involved with some of it, and I know some of the fun back story. But that same humanity means I’m human, and I have other things on my mind too.

This may sound crass, but it’s true: it’s my blog, and I’ll write what I want to. If you don’t like it, there are lots of other sites about astronomy on the web. Spare me the lectures, the drama, and the grandstanding in the comments. If you don’t want to read my blog, that’s fine. ...

zerro1 wrote:This is by far the most insulting image you could have posted! With all of the amature astronmers who have taken the time to submit their images and you people choose this as an APOD....I'm through! Bye Bye!

owlice wrote:zerro, you REALLY need to go back and read your post about how much it costs you to create the images. The entire point of your post was that because YOU spend money on YOUR hobby, APOD should NOT have had a QR Code as today's image -- an image by an amateur astrophotographer should have been selected instead.

Seriously -- go back and read that post.

by Guest » Tue Oct 04, 2011 9:27 pm

zerro1 wrote:
This is by far the most insulting image you could have posted! With all of the amature astronmers who have taken the time to submit their images and you people choose this as an APOD....I'm through! Bye Bye!

oh no what would we do without you and your 11 posts lol....idiot.