[APBeta] Seeing/Transparency

Fri Aug 7 14:22:27 PDT 2009

Hi folks,

I'm the requester. I logged over 5000 observations in AP already and I more
than ever feel the need to log many details, both of the object and the
environmentals.

My reasoning is that values such as seeing, transparency and SQM (sky
quality, a measurement for darkness) are of great importance to an
observation. Seeing and transparency change during an observing session. So
does SQM, to an even greater extent. My Unihedron Sky Quality Meter also
measures temperature, which I also log (although not directly of influence
to an objects visibility). These variables together create a database I find
more than a little useful. Thanks to AP and these logged values I can
instantly recall the conditions under which an object was visible. To me
it’s invaluable.

While a general value for seeing, transparency and SQM is acceptable for a
session I definitely won’t stop to log these details separately for an
observed object. Currently AP allows plenty of user fields to be added to an
observation, so the option is there. However, these values are not repeated
for the next observations logged in a session, requiring them to be entered
manually again and again. It would have my great preference to see AP have
the option to fill in a value for a user field which would then be
duplicated for the next observation (of a different object), until the value
changes, after which the new value will be used for subsequent observations.
Actually, I could live without fields for seeing & transparency for the
session, as I could enter this in a brief description of the session itself.

In the field I have often noticed seeing is different for different parts of
the sky. Hence my desire to enter different values during a session. Same
goes for transparency, light pollution or Lunar interference. What about
winds that shake your scope early in the session but die down later at
night, allowing stable views and easier split double stars?

All of that and a new SQM reading roughly every fifteen minutes. That’s why
I put in the request.

Best wishes to all,

 Victor van Wulfen

Handtekening

  <http://www.clearskies.eu/> www.clearskies.eu

Van: Paul Kemp [mailto:paul at bluedahlia.co.nz] 
Verzonden: vrijdag 7 augustus 2009 22:04
Aan: AstroPlanner Beta Testers
Onderwerp: Re: [APBeta] Seeing/Transparency

I see the rationale for b, but I think that a is probably the best option.
Offers functionality and ease. I am starting to see APv2 getting more
complicated regarding logging observations.

When I log observations 3000+, I just take the general feel for seeing over
the whole session.

Paul Kemp
13.1" f5 Reflector with Argo Navis & Paracorr
Auckland, New Zealand
36° 55' 09" South, 174° 43' 30" East

--- The Southern Sentinel ---
 <http://www.southernsentinel.co.nz> www.southernsentinel.co.nz

Checkout my Twitter:  <http://twitter.com/pulinski> twitter.com/pulinski

On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 7:36 AM, David Crum < <mailto:crum.david at gmail.com>
crum.david at gmail.com> wrote:

I too kinda like option B, but like other posters have already said,
it's not that big a deal.  So, either way works :)

On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 3:29 PM, Hilary Jones< <mailto:hdjones at pacbell.net>
hdjones at pacbell.net> wrote:
> I'll vote for b.  But realistically it's not going to make a big
difference
> to me either way.
>
> Hilary
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Rodman" <
<mailto:paul at ilanga.com> paul at ilanga.com>
> To: "AstroPlanner Beta Testers" < <mailto:apbeta at lists.astroplanner.net>
apbeta at lists.astroplanner.net>
> Sent: Friday, August 07, 2009 10:29 AM
> Subject: [APBeta] Seeing/Transparency
>
>
>> Folks,
>>
>> A user has requested that the Seeing/Transparency be per observation*
>> rather than per session, his argument being that those values change
over
>> the period of an observing session. Does anyone else have strong
feelings
>> about this either way?
>>
>> As I see it (sic):
>>
>> a. Per session: less hassle, but not so fine grained. If the seeing
(say)
>> changed from bad to good over the period of the session, it  might not be
>> clear as to why an observation was or wasn't successful.
>>
>> b. Per observation: more hassle (although the default would be to make
the
>> value the same as for the last observation in the session).  Session
could
>> display range of seeing/transparency based on its  included observations.
>>
>> Paul R.
>>
>> * per resource-combination within an observation might be pushing it.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> APBeta mailing list
>>  <mailto:APBeta at lists.astroplanner.net> APBeta at lists.astroplanner.net
>>  <http://lists.astroplanner.net/listinfo.cgi/apbeta-astroplanner.net>
http://lists.astroplanner.net/listinfo.cgi/apbeta-astroplanner.net
>
> _______________________________________________
> APBeta mailing list
>  <mailto:APBeta at lists.astroplanner.net> APBeta at lists.astroplanner.net
>  <http://lists.astroplanner.net/listinfo.cgi/apbeta-astroplanner.net>
http://lists.astroplanner.net/listinfo.cgi/apbeta-astroplanner.net
>
_______________________________________________
APBeta mailing list
 <mailto:APBeta at lists.astroplanner.net> APBeta at lists.astroplanner.net
 <http://lists.astroplanner.net/listinfo.cgi/apbeta-astroplanner.net>
http://lists.astroplanner.net/listinfo.cgi/apbeta-astroplanner.net

Van: Paul Kemp [mailto:paul at bluedahlia.co.nz] 
Verzonden: vrijdag 7 augustus 2009 22:04
Aan: AstroPlanner Beta Testers
Onderwerp: Re: [APBeta] Seeing/Transparency

I see the rationale for b, but I think that a is probably the best option.
Offers functionality and ease. I am starting to see APv2 getting more
complicated regarding logging observations.

When I log observations 3000+, I just take the general feel for seeing over
the whole session.

Paul Kemp
13.1" f5 Reflector with Argo Navis & Paracorr
Auckland, New Zealand
36° 55' 09" South, 174° 43' 30" East

--- The Southern Sentinel ---
www.southernsentinel.co.nz

Checkout my Twitter: twitter.com/pulinski

On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 7:36 AM, David Crum <crum.david at gmail.com> wrote:

I too kinda like option B, but like other posters have already said,
it's not that big a deal.  So, either way works :)

On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 3:29 PM, Hilary Jones<hdjones at pacbell.net> wrote:
> I'll vote for b.  But realistically it's not going to make a big
difference
> to me either way.
>
> Hilary
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Rodman" <paul at ilanga.com>
> To: "AstroPlanner Beta Testers" <apbeta at lists.astroplanner.net>
> Sent: Friday, August 07, 2009 10:29 AM
> Subject: [APBeta] Seeing/Transparency
>
>
>> Folks,
>>
>> A user has requested that the Seeing/Transparency be per observation*
>> rather than per session, his argument being that those values change
over
>> the period of an observing session. Does anyone else have strong
feelings
>> about this either way?
>>
>> As I see it (sic):
>>
>> a. Per session: less hassle, but not so fine grained. If the seeing
(say)
>> changed from bad to good over the period of the session, it  might not be
>> clear as to why an observation was or wasn't successful.
>>
>> b. Per observation: more hassle (although the default would be to make
the
>> value the same as for the last observation in the session).  Session
could
>> display range of seeing/transparency based on its  included observations.
>>
>> Paul R.
>>
>> * per resource-combination within an observation might be pushing it.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> APBeta mailing list
>> APBeta at lists.astroplanner.net
>> http://lists.astroplanner.net/listinfo.cgi/apbeta-astroplanner.net
>
> _______________________________________________
> APBeta mailing list
> APBeta at lists.astroplanner.net
> http://lists.astroplanner.net/listinfo.cgi/apbeta-astroplanner.net
>
_______________________________________________
APBeta mailing list
APBeta at lists.astroplanner.net
http://lists.astroplanner.net/listinfo.cgi/apbeta-astroplanner.net

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.astroplanner.net/pipermail/apbeta-astroplanner.net/attachments/20090807/7d1e81cb/attachment-0003.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 4838 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.astroplanner.net/pipermail/apbeta-astroplanner.net/attachments/20090807/7d1e81cb/attachment-0003.jpeg>