Skip to search.

Breaking News Visit Yahoo! News for the latest.

×Close this window

FLI_Imaging_Systems

The Yahoo! Groups Product Blog

Check it out!

Group Information

  • Members: 553
  • Category: Astrophotography
  • Founded: Mar 12, 2007
  • Language: English
? Already a member? Sign in to Yahoo!

Yahoo! Groups Tips

Did you know...
Real people. Real stories. See how Yahoo! Groups impacts members worldwide.

Messages

Advanced
Messages Help
Messages 9754 - 9783 of 12275   Oldest  |  < Older  |  Newer >  |  Newest
Messages: Show Message Summaries Sort by Date ^  
#9754 From: Tim Khan <timkhan@...>
Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 9:51 pm
Subject: Re: Help me determine my back focus correctly.
timkhan
Send Email Send Email
 
Catching up on posts here Dean...you would have to add 1mm to your spacer; so I come up with 11.5mm, but you have a tolerance of 1mm so you ought to be fine.
 
BTW, perhaps next year...I can always enter in WSP photo contest :)
 
 
From: Dean S <dean@...>
To: FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, November 7, 2011 3:18 PM
Subject: [FLI_Imaging_Systems] Help me determine my back focus correctly.

 
Hi All,
 
I want to verify I am figuring my image train correctly to my corrector.
 
Corrector needs 77.5mm +/- 1mm from flange.
 
I have; camera 25mm, wheel 25mm,  OAG 17mm,  =  67mm
 
I am using 3mm thick filters (yea I know)  They say to allow 1mm, but add to what?  image train or to corrector specs? 
 
What size spacer do I need between the OAG and corrector to get me the right distance?  ( I ordered a 12.5mm )
 
Thanks
Dean
 
 



#9755 From: <rdcrisp@...>
Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 10:08 pm
Subject: Re: Re: An RBI question for Richard,
rdcrisp
Send Email Send Email
 
I would not recommend doing it that way.
 
unless you can guarantee the traps are fully filled, you have the sensor in an indeterminate state.
 
that’s bad
 
you can’t calibrate the Dark Fixed Pattern Noise out by dark subtraction in that event.
 
the RBI is usually more aggravated by longer wavelength light: in the Red to NIR range. The EL Panels don’t have much red response. That’s going to mean that you will have to flood for perhaps a minute or more and that’s not practical
 
also you’d need to index to a non-occupied filter slot to not further foul things up.... the filters usually have NIR cut coating or if you are using an emission line filter you will overly restrict the light  flux
 
I’d suggest ditching the Bisque software and using Maxim.
 
 
 
From: Olivier
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 7:50 PM
Subject: [FLI_Imaging_Systems] Re: An RBI question for Richard,
 
 


Hi Richard,
Thank you for the quick reply. I do image on my own so that is one advantage.As for time, well, a solution is better than none and I can write a script in CCD Commander to do that and a little VB program to turn the el panel on and off. So you gave me a way that, for me, is simpler than learning how to write a ccdsoft plugin, and cheaper than buying Maxim: Thanks again, now I have a path forward
Cheers
Olivier
--- In mailto:FLI_Imaging_Systems%40yahoogroups.com, "kjcphoto2001" <kjcstudio@...> wrote:
>
>
> Oliver,
>
> I used CCDSoft to image also. After waiting for 2 years, I finally gave up on a driver being developed for CCDSoft and bought a copy of Maxim to operate the RBI feature. The problem is you have to flood the chip before each exposure(lights and darks). If you are imaging all night at a star party, your neighbors aren't going to appreciate your light going on after every exposure. If you are imaging alone at your own site, it would probably work, but you will lose a lot of imaging time and a lot of sleep.
>
>
> --- In mailto:FLI_Imaging_Systems%40yahoogroups.com, "Olivier" <olivierfp@> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> > I use CCDSoft with an ML16803 and do not have a way to activate the NIR flood. I was wondering if using light from an el flat screen could achieve the same purpose? It may take a higher intensity and longer to reach the area where the traps are, but could this be a workable technique? The laser light RBI slide in your SPIE paper seems to indicate it could, but I am not the expert here.
> > Regards
> > Olivier
> >
>


#9756 From: <rdcrisp@...>
Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 10:10 pm
Subject: Re: An RBI question for Richard,
rdcrisp
Send Email Send Email
 
Ditch Bisque and use Maxim
 
I suspect the only reason you use CCDSOFT is because it came free with an SBIG camera.
 
Since you probably ditched the clearly inferior SBIG product, I recommend doing the same with the clearly deficient BISQUE software.
 
Clearly deficient in the sense that it doesn’t permit you to use the features built into the camera.
 
 
 
From: Olivier
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 7:01 PM
Subject: [FLI_Imaging_Systems] An RBI question for Richard,
 
 

Hi,
I use CCDSoft with an ML16803 and do not have a way to activate the NIR flood. I was wondering if using light from an el flat screen could achieve the same purpose? It may take a higher intensity and longer to reach the area where the traps are, but could this be a workable technique? The laser light RBI slide in your SPIE paper seems to indicate it could, but I am not the expert here.
Regards
Olivier


#9757 From: Tim Khan <timkhan@...>
Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 10:18 pm
Subject: Re: Re: My opinion
timkhan
Send Email Send Email
 
Someone brought this up at Chiefland, and I said to the best of my knowledge the only exchange is technical information. People will fabricate all sorts of notions of 'whatever' to favor either themselves or their own products.
From: Dean S <dean@...>
To: FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, November 8, 2011 4:48 PM
Subject: [FLI_Imaging_Systems] Re: My opinion

 
Matt,
 
Where you around for the “thin the herd” thread???  That should go down in history like this one.
 
I heard rumors from AIC about Crisp and how is assumed association with FLI is hurting them in the market.
 
 
 
Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 2011 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: [FLI_Imaging_Systems] Re: My opinon
 


Rouzbeh,

You have my support and I could add to the list, but you already made your point.

No other group I listen in to have the frequency of statements like the ones you listed.

BR
Matts



7 nov 2011 kl. 23:59 skrev "roozbeh_bid" <rbidshahri@...>:

 


"it is unusual it doesn’t happen very often Jeanette"

I have to point out the contradiction here.
Unfortunately we have to bear examples like these in the past few days:

"It seems I have to tell people this simple thing about 50 times per year"
"here are doing when you do dumb things"
"I am just trying to teach you that obviously don’t understand"
"of putting garish oversaturated crap up on the internet and calling it a “pretty pictureâ€"
"Perhaps it is a cultural thing? I’ve certainly noticed a correlation."
"I did lump it into a growing set that I collectively call crap"ö
"ignorant teaching the beginners utter rubbish"

I doubt anybody will appreciate these comments whatever your intentions/reasons specially the borderline racial ones!

As you can see these have already had a detrimental effect on Jeanette.

I do agree with one line though:

"you can do what you want including destroying faint reflection….."

--- In FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com, <rdcrisp@...> wrote:
>
> it is unusual
>
> it doesn’t happen very often Jeanette
>
>
>
> From: nettielamb63
> Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 2:12 PM
> To: FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [FLI_Imaging_Systems] My opinon
>
>
> I joined this group because I will soon be levelling up from my unmodded DSLR.
> I was recommended a FLI by Paul Haese and Mike Sidonio.
> But if the recent "crap" I've witnessed in this group is the sort of abuse I'm to expect when I start posting my first images, well, I'd rather buy a different brand of camera just so I can join a support group where I know I won't be dumped on for processing an image to my own taste.
> You've lost me here and FLI have lost a customer.
> cs
> Jeanette Dunphy
>




#9758 From: <rdcrisp@...>
Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 10:19 pm
Subject: Re: Re: My opinion
rdcrisp
Send Email Send Email
 
if people make buy/no-buy decisions on the basis of slanderous rumors and choose demonstrably inferior products solely on that basis they fail the intelligence test in my opinion
 
they are perfect candidates to buy QSI and SBIG products in other words
 
 
 
 
From: Dean S
Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 2011 1:48 PM
Subject: [FLI_Imaging_Systems] Re: My opinion
 
 

Matt,
 
Where you around for the “thin the herd” thread???  That should go down in history like this one.
 
I heard rumors from AIC about Crisp and how is assumed association with FLI is hurting them in the market.
 
 
 
Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 2011 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: [FLI_Imaging_Systems] Re: My opinon
 


Rouzbeh,

You have my support and I could add to the list, but you already made your point.

No other group I listen in to have the frequency of statements like the ones you listed.

BR
Matts



7 nov 2011 kl. 23:59 skrev "roozbeh_bid" <rbidshahri@...>:

 



"it is unusual it doesn’t happen very often Jeanette"

I have to point out the contradiction here.
Unfortunately we have to bear examples like these in the past few days:

"It seems I have to tell people this simple thing about 50 times per year"
"here are doing when you do dumb things"
"I am just trying to teach you that obviously don’t understand"
"of putting garish oversaturated crap up on the internet and calling it a “pretty pictureâ€"
"Perhaps it is a cultural thing? I’ve certainly noticed a correlation."
"I did lump it into a growing set that I collectively call crap"ö
"ignorant teaching the beginners utter rubbish"

I doubt anybody will appreciate these comments whatever your intentions/reasons specially the borderline racial ones!

As you can see these have already had a detrimental effect on Jeanette.

I do agree with one line though:

"you can do what you want including destroying faint reflection….."

--- In FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com, <rdcrisp@...> wrote:
>
> it is unusual
>
> it doesn’t happen very often Jeanette
>
>
>
> From: nettielamb63
> Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 2:12 PM
> To: FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [FLI_Imaging_Systems] My opinon
>
>
> I joined this group because I will soon be levelling up from my unmodded DSLR.
> I was recommended a FLI by Paul Haese and Mike Sidonio.
> But if the recent "crap" I've witnessed in this group is the sort of abuse I'm to expect when I start posting my first images, well, I'd rather buy a different brand of camera just so I can join a support group where I know I won't be dumped on for processing an image to my own taste.
> You've lost me here and FLI have lost a customer.
> cs
> Jeanette Dunphy
>


#9759 From: "Dean S" <dean@...>
Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 12:06 am
Subject: RE: Help me determine my back focus correctly.
searay90350
Send Email Send Email
 

Thanks Tim,  that is what I thought.  Not sure how I missed by 1mm with my original calculation but is within their stated tolerance.

 

As for WSP, let the wind blow so my trusty little Epsilon can come thru yet again J  Of course if I don’t bring the big scope it will be calm every night.

 

 

 

From: FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Tim Khan
Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 2011 4:52 PM
To: FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [FLI_Imaging_Systems] Help me determine my back focus correctly.

 




Catching up on posts here Dean...you would have to add 1mm to your spacer; so I come up with 11.5mm, but you have a tolerance of 1mm so you ought to be fine.

 

BTW, perhaps next year...I can always enter in WSP photo contest :)

 

 

From: Dean S <dean@...>
To: FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, November 7, 2011 3:18 PM
Subject: [FLI_Imaging_Systems] Help me determine my back focus correctly.

 

Hi All,

 

I want to verify I am figuring my image train correctly to my corrector.

 

Corrector needs 77.5mm +/- 1mm from flange.

 

I have; camera 25mm, wheel 25mm,  OAG 17mm,  =  67mm

 

I am using 3mm thick filters (yea I know)  They say to allow 1mm, but add to what?  image train or to corrector specs? 

 

What size spacer do I need between the OAG and corrector to get me the right distance?  ( I ordered a 12.5mm )

 

Thanks

Dean

 

 

 





No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.1869 / Virus Database: 2092/4605 - Release Date: 11/08/11

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.1869 / Virus Database: 2092/4605 - Release Date: 11/08/11


#9760 From: "Jim" <jmoronski-ng@...>
Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 11:59 pm
Subject: Re: My opinion
jmoronski
Send Email Send Email
 
Matt, Rouzbeh, et al.,

The uncensored and non-moderated policy on this group is a result of FLI's (my)
desire to not moderate or censor its forum. FLI does not have the manpower to do
so. If we did this, we would end up with a long lag between released messages.
You see this already when images are posted and I have to release them. We could
hire someone to do this for us (you). I would then raise the prices on our
products to pay this person's salary and benefits. This benefits nobody.

We would then have to decide "offensive" or "constructive". That would be very
subjective. That would likely result in posters being made upset. Just the
opposite policy of what we have now would likely result in the same amount of
pain for FLI. Furthermore, it would definitely squelch debate and science as
people would be afraid to tick off the moderator.

That being said, we expose the nature of our competitors' groups. Their groups
are locked down tighter than bank vault. If we had the same policy, it would be
easy for us to adopt or perceived to have adopted a screening policy that would
prohibit any message from being posted that seemed critical of FLI's products or
even mentioned our competitors'. It certainly would make my life easier if
nobody, in an open forum, discussed what would be, in open debate, viewed as a
product defect or deficiency. Imagine the QSI vs FLI debate on any other forum.
You all know there was no interference by FLI on this. All of you know you can
bring up anything, be it positive or negative, without repercussion from FLI.

FLI delivers the best products and world class service. They are not without
flaws or deficiencies, but they are the best. To provide an on-point example,
look at the current CCDSoft discussion going on. I am the FLI software guy. If I
were a moderator of convenience, like our competitors', that would never have
made it to the group. Neither would the "which filters are better" discussion,
"halos", etc...

This group has some vocal members. Some fly off the handle and say things they
shouldn't. Seriously, nobody should be told their images look like crap. That
was out of line. But, those comments can be ignored or self-censored. If you
don't like what you hear, then hit the delete key. This is no different than the
television. These same people, more often than not, provide valuable technical
knowledge to the group. I have been chastised hard and long for not banning
certain members. Some hate me for taking this stand. And, yes Dean, we likely
have lost business as a result of this. I have been told as much. I would rather
lose business than fall on my principles. Squelching speech is not me.

If this prevents you from buying a product from us, I believe you should
reconsider. Think of this as a strength, not weakness. Just remember that
whenever you need help or have a question and FLI isn't available or your
question is beyond the scope of what FLI provides, you might get help and what
you need. You will also get information that has not been screened or adjusted
to/for FLI's taste. Just look over the last few years of the things that have
been covered on this group. Imagine what the field would be like without it.

Regards,
Jim Moronski
FLI Yahoo! Groups Moderator
Finger Lakes Instrumentation, LLC

#9761 From: Jim Moronski <jmoronski-ng@...>
Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 12:48 am
Subject: Re: An RBI question for Richard,
jmoronski
Send Email Send Email
 
Plug-ins are currently being written for CCDSoft and TheSkyX. Betas
should be posted to the group before the end of the year. I know this
has been said before, but the development is right now and is active.

-Jim

On 11/8/2011 5:10 PM, rdcrisp@... wrote:
>
>
> Ditch Bisque and use Maxim
> I suspect the only reason you use CCDSOFT is because it came free with
> an SBIG camera.
> Since you probably ditched the clearly inferior SBIG product, I
> recommend doing the same with the clearly deficient BISQUE software.
> Clearly deficient in the sense that it doesn’t permit you to use the
> features built into the camera.
> *From:* Olivier <mailto:olivierfp@...>
> *Sent:* Monday, November 07, 2011 7:01 PM
> *To:* FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com>
> *Subject:* [FLI_Imaging_Systems] An RBI question for Richard,
>
> Hi,
> I use CCDSoft with an ML16803 and do not have a way to activate the NIR
> flood. I was wondering if using light from an el flat screen could
> achieve the same purpose? It may take a higher intensity and longer to
> reach the area where the traps are, but could this be a workable
> technique? The laser light RBI slide in your SPIE paper seems to
> indicate it could, but I am not the expert here.
> Regards
> Olivier
>
>
>
>

#9762 From: <rdcrisp@...>
Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 12:53 am
Subject: Re: Help me determine my back focus correctly.
rdcrisp
Send Email Send Email
 
I would recommend camera lenses and let the winds blow!
 
If I could easily ship my gear from califruitty, I’d do it just to hang out with my buds.....
 
 
 
 
 
From: Dean S
Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 2011 4:06 PM
Subject: RE: [FLI_Imaging_Systems] Help me determine my back focus correctly.
 
 

Thanks Tim,  that is what I thought.  Not sure how I missed by 1mm with my original calculation but is within their stated tolerance.

As for WSP, let the wind blow so my trusty little Epsilon can come thru yet again J  Of course if I don’t bring the big scope it will be calm every night.

From: FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Tim Khan
Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 2011 4:52 PM
To: FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [FLI_Imaging_Systems] Help me determine my back focus correctly.




Catching up on posts here Dean...you would have to add 1mm to your spacer; so I come up with 11.5mm, but you have a tolerance of 1mm so you ought to be fine.

BTW, perhaps next year...I can always enter in WSP photo contest :)

From: Dean S <dean@...>
To: FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, November 7, 2011 3:18 PM
Subject: [FLI_Imaging_Systems] Help me determine my back focus correctly.

 

Hi All,

I want to verify I am figuring my image train correctly to my corrector.

Corrector needs 77.5mm +/- 1mm from flange.

I have; camera 25mm, wheel 25mm,  OAG 17mm,  =  67mm

I am using 3mm thick filters (yea I know)  They say to allow 1mm, but add to what?  image train or to corrector specs? 

What size spacer do I need between the OAG and corrector to get me the right distance?  ( I ordered a 12.5mm )

Thanks

Dean





No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.1869 / Virus Database: 2092/4605 - Release Date: 11/08/11

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.1869 / Virus Database: 2092/4605 - Release Date: 11/08/11


#9763 From: <rdcrisp@...>
Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 12:55 am
Subject: Re: Re: My opinion
rdcrisp
Send Email Send Email
 
In another life Jim could be a diplomat Smile
 
I can and will cease using the word “crap”...
 
I like to make my points with strong support that often amounts to using a cannon to kill a fly. The fly is certainly dead but it may knock down the building... that isn’t helpful
 
I’ll try to go back to my “if I can’t say something nice, then say nothing” mode...
 
 
 
 
From: Jim
Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 2011 3:59 PM
Subject: [FLI_Imaging_Systems] Re: My opinion
 
 

Matt, Rouzbeh, et al.,

The uncensored and non-moderated policy on this group is a result of FLI's (my) desire to not moderate or censor its forum. FLI does not have the manpower to do so. If we did this, we would end up with a long lag between released messages. You see this already when images are posted and I have to release them. We could hire someone to do this for us (you). I would then raise the prices on our products to pay this person's salary and benefits. This benefits nobody.

We would then have to decide "offensive" or "constructive". That would be very subjective. That would likely result in posters being made upset. Just the opposite policy of what we have now would likely result in the same amount of pain for FLI. Furthermore, it would definitely squelch debate and science as people would be afraid to tick off the moderator.

That being said, we expose the nature of our competitors' groups. Their groups are locked down tighter than bank vault. If we had the same policy, it would be easy for us to adopt or perceived to have adopted a screening policy that would prohibit any message from being posted that seemed critical of FLI's products or even mentioned our competitors'. It certainly would make my life easier if nobody, in an open forum, discussed what would be, in open debate, viewed as a product defect or deficiency. Imagine the QSI vs FLI debate on any other forum. You all know there was no interference by FLI on this. All of you know you can bring up anything, be it positive or negative, without repercussion from FLI.

FLI delivers the best products and world class service. They are not without flaws or deficiencies, but they are the best. To provide an on-point example, look at the current CCDSoft discussion going on. I am the FLI software guy. If I were a moderator of convenience, like our competitors', that would never have made it to the group. Neither would the "which filters are better" discussion, "halos", etc...

This group has some vocal members. Some fly off the handle and say things they shouldn't. Seriously, nobody should be told their images look like crap. That was out of line. But, those comments can be ignored or self-censored. If you don't like what you hear, then hit the delete key. This is no different than the television. These same people, more often than not, provide valuable technical knowledge to the group. I have been chastised hard and long for not banning certain members. Some hate me for taking this stand. And, yes Dean, we likely have lost business as a result of this. I have been told as much. I would rather lose business than fall on my principles. Squelching speech is not me.

If this prevents you from buying a product from us, I believe you should reconsider. Think of this as a strength, not weakness. Just remember that whenever you need help or have a question and FLI isn't available or your question is beyond the scope of what FLI provides, you might get help and what you need. You will also get information that has not been screened or adjusted to/for FLI's taste. Just look over the last few years of the things that have been covered on this group. Imagine what the field would be like without it.

Regards,
Jim Moronski
FLI Yahoo! Groups Moderator
Finger Lakes Instrumentation, LLC


#9764 From: "Southern Stars Observatories" <jcpelle@...>
Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 1:25 am
Subject: RE: Re: My opinion and mine...
jcpelle
Send Email Send Email
 
> The uncensored and non-moderated policy on this ....

Jim, this is absolutely false and I may prove it.

It is forbidden to tell the truth about difficulties encountered with your
products
and your totally deficient support.

You delivered to us a PL9000, at full price, that was barely in alpha test mode,
we
had failures after failures, and your only proposal was that we spend at least
2000
USD for a camera a few weeks old. You refused our proposal that was at a very
minimal cost for you as well as for us. And  years after it is not yet fixed.

You have time to moderate the list, but not to answer about what you did with
the
money (thousands of USD) we sent several years ago for a filter wheel and a set
of
Astrodon filters never received.

There is no way to believe what you tell. 48 hours after we had *privately*
reported
ice crystals on our CCD (on a some 100 days camera) you wrote on the FLI list
"FLI
cameras never leak"! What a lie!

The only allowed critics on your list are these made by your sponsored hit man
against all your competitors and some providers he had issues for reasons not
even
related to technical issues, but personal issues. You may not, in good faith
ignore
that.

But there is worse, you let (and certainly encourage) him to made claims you
perfectly know are false, just because they serve your interests.


I had only false promises after false promises from FLI.


> Their groups are locked down tighter than bank vault.

Absolutely false, it is just brainwashing, but you are an expert in that matter.
There is not a week without, on some of these groups, people reporting issues,
And not only they may be freely discussed, but they are solved on the contrary
of
what I see with FLI, where the one complaining is immediately told to contact
off-list and moderated.


> FLI delivers the best products and world class service. They are not without
> flaws or deficiencies, but they are the best.

The best..., it is just commercial claims, you have yet to prove it to me and
not by
an additional cost of more than 2000 USD.

> This group has some vocal members.

Why the plural? There is only your sponsored guy.


> These same people, more often than not, provide valuable technical
> knowledge to the group.

Add 'biased' please.


> Squelching speech is not me.

I am waiting to see that mail on your list

> Jim Moronski
> FLI Yahoo! Groups Moderator
              ****************

That is the best one! The group is not moderated, but there is a moderator!

One more lie from you, Jim, sorry.

If you want an extended list of your lies and these of Greg, ask me, just allow
me
to use your mails.


Now I will appreciate if I may use my PL9000. All the issues you may not ignore
Where well inside the warranty period (a few months), and you were told in time.

I want these issues fixed, if you are not courageous enough to publish that
mail, it
doesn't matters.

And BTW, point me to only one message to the list in which what I wrote was not
the
truth.
You moderate me just because I was telling the truth about the failures of your
products and services.

It is a surprising implementation of free speech.



Jean-Claude PELLE
Southern Stars Observatories.

#9765 From: "chuck" <goalt00@...>
Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 2:24 am
Subject: Re: My opinion
goalt00
Send Email Send Email
 
Statements like this are what keeps me coming back to FLI when I feel the need
to upgrade imaging equipment. I really appreciate the honest and straight
forward way they do business. I have been lied to by just about all of the other
cam makers out there. One even took full payment up front and NEVER delivered
the product. Dealing with FLI is like breathing fresh air again.

Richard doesn't work for FLI and to not consider purchasing from them because of
his statements is like cutting your nose off despite your face. Equipment should
be judged based on specs not what people discuss on user groups.

In ways I can understand why Richard is a bit harsh in his statements. He has an
extensive technical background and understands why things need to be done a
certain way. Now imagine if you were him and year after year you had to keep
explaining the same basic ideas over and over again. Then toss in a bunch of
people who will deny to the bitter end that what you are saying is even
truthful. Yes maybe he could tone it down a bit sometimes but put into the above
context I can understand his frustration.

Maybe this can all be put into a new marketing ploy for the other companies. Buy
our equipment over FLI's because you don't want Richard Crisp showing up at your
house to personally attack you and forget about the fact that it's an inferior
product. Lame I know but I wouldn't put it past them.

Chuck




--- In FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com, "Jim" <jmoronski-ng@...> wrote:
>
> Matt, Rouzbeh, et al.,
>
> The uncensored and non-moderated policy on this group is a result of FLI's
(my) desire to not moderate or censor its forum. FLI does not have the manpower
to do so. If we did this, we would end up with a long lag between released
messages. You see this already when images are posted and I have to release
them. We could hire someone to do this for us (you). I would then raise the
prices on our products to pay this person's salary and benefits. This benefits
nobody.
>
> We would then have to decide "offensive" or "constructive". That would be very
subjective. That would likely result in posters being made upset. Just the
opposite policy of what we have now would likely result in the same amount of
pain for FLI. Furthermore, it would definitely squelch debate and science as
people would be afraid to tick off the moderator.
>
> That being said, we expose the nature of our competitors' groups. Their groups
are locked down tighter than bank vault. If we had the same policy, it would be
easy for us to adopt or perceived to have adopted a screening policy that would
prohibit any message from being posted that seemed critical of FLI's products or
even mentioned our competitors'. It certainly would make my life easier if
nobody, in an open forum, discussed what would be, in open debate, viewed as a
product defect or deficiency. Imagine the QSI vs FLI debate on any other forum.
You all know there was no interference by FLI on this. All of you know you can
bring up anything, be it positive or negative, without repercussion from FLI.
>
> FLI delivers the best products and world class service. They are not without
flaws or deficiencies, but they are the best. To provide an on-point example,
look at the current CCDSoft discussion going on. I am the FLI software guy. If I
were a moderator of convenience, like our competitors', that would never have
made it to the group. Neither would the "which filters are better" discussion,
"halos", etc...
>
> This group has some vocal members. Some fly off the handle and say things they
shouldn't. Seriously, nobody should be told their images look like crap. That
was out of line. But, those comments can be ignored or self-censored. If you
don't like what you hear, then hit the delete key. This is no different than the
television. These same people, more often than not, provide valuable technical
knowledge to the group. I have been chastised hard and long for not banning
certain members. Some hate me for taking this stand. And, yes Dean, we likely
have lost business as a result of this. I have been told as much. I would rather
lose business than fall on my principles. Squelching speech is not me.
>
> If this prevents you from buying a product from us, I believe you should
reconsider. Think of this as a strength, not weakness. Just remember that
whenever you need help or have a question and FLI isn't available or your
question is beyond the scope of what FLI provides, you might get help and what
you need. You will also get information that has not been screened or adjusted
to/for FLI's taste. Just look over the last few years of the things that have
been covered on this group. Imagine what the field would be like without it.
>
> Regards,
> Jim Moronski
> FLI Yahoo! Groups Moderator
> Finger Lakes Instrumentation, LLC
>

#9766 From: "chuck" <goalt00@...>
Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 2:42 am
Subject: Re: My opinion and mine...
goalt00
Send Email Send Email
 
Not to get into a argument with you but your post made it's way onto the user
group. Now maybe Jim could respond to this?


--- In FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com, "Southern Stars Observatories"
<jcpelle@...> wrote:
>
> > The uncensored and non-moderated policy on this ....
>
> Jim, this is absolutely false and I may prove it.
>
> It is forbidden to tell the truth about difficulties encountered with your
products
> and your totally deficient support.
>
> You delivered to us a PL9000, at full price, that was barely in alpha test
mode, we
> had failures after failures, and your only proposal was that we spend at least
2000
> USD for a camera a few weeks old. You refused our proposal that was at a very
> minimal cost for you as well as for us. And  years after it is not yet fixed.
>
> You have time to moderate the list, but not to answer about what you did with
the
> money (thousands of USD) we sent several years ago for a filter wheel and a
set of
> Astrodon filters never received.
>
> There is no way to believe what you tell. 48 hours after we had *privately*
reported
> ice crystals on our CCD (on a some 100 days camera) you wrote on the FLI list
"FLI
> cameras never leak"! What a lie!
>
> The only allowed critics on your list are these made by your sponsored hit man
> against all your competitors and some providers he had issues for reasons not
even
> related to technical issues, but personal issues. You may not, in good faith
ignore
> that.
>
> But there is worse, you let (and certainly encourage) him to made claims you
> perfectly know are false, just because they serve your interests.
>
>
> I had only false promises after false promises from FLI.
>
>
> > Their groups are locked down tighter than bank vault.
>
> Absolutely false, it is just brainwashing, but you are an expert in that
matter.
> There is not a week without, on some of these groups, people reporting issues,
> And not only they may be freely discussed, but they are solved on the contrary
of
> what I see with FLI, where the one complaining is immediately told to contact
> off-list and moderated.
>
>
> > FLI delivers the best products and world class service. They are not without
> > flaws or deficiencies, but they are the best.
>
> The best..., it is just commercial claims, you have yet to prove it to me and
not by
> an additional cost of more than 2000 USD.
>
> > This group has some vocal members.
>
> Why the plural? There is only your sponsored guy.
>
>
> > These same people, more often than not, provide valuable technical
> > knowledge to the group.
>
> Add 'biased' please.
>
>
> > Squelching speech is not me.
>
> I am waiting to see that mail on your list
>
> > Jim Moronski
> > FLI Yahoo! Groups Moderator
>              ****************
>
> That is the best one! The group is not moderated, but there is a moderator!
>
> One more lie from you, Jim, sorry.
>
> If you want an extended list of your lies and these of Greg, ask me, just
allow me
> to use your mails.
>
>
> Now I will appreciate if I may use my PL9000. All the issues you may not
ignore
> Where well inside the warranty period (a few months), and you were told in
time.
>
> I want these issues fixed, if you are not courageous enough to publish that
mail, it
> doesn't matters.
>
> And BTW, point me to only one message to the list in which what I wrote was
not the
> truth.
> You moderate me just because I was telling the truth about the failures of
your
> products and services.
>
> It is a surprising implementation of free speech.
>
>
>
> Jean-Claude PELLE
> Southern Stars Observatories.
>

#9767 From: "observe_m13" <JunkMailGoesHere@...>
Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 3:52 am
Subject: Re: My opinion
observe_m13
Send Email Send Email
 
Rumors are just that - rumors.  If you base your hardware purchase on some
perceived imbalance of opinion, I think you could do far worse than listen to
Richard. Yes, he is abrasive. Yes, he is not politically correct. Too bad.
Listen to what he says and not how he says it. He is far from ignorant about the
issues he discusses. He lives, breathes, and works with this stuff all time.

A pretty picture is just that as well. Some people appreciate the oversaturated
blindingly contrast boosted photos. Others don't and appreciate subtly. Once
again, they are opinions, not absolute truths. Get the best hardware you can,
image to your best ability, and massage the data as little or as much as you
wish. Publish it for all to comment on or keep it private, sitting back and
enjoying the fruits of your labor without extraneous comment. If you put it out
there for comments and opinions, then comments and opinions you will get, both
positive and negative; deal with it! That's life! Pretty simple isn't it?


--- In FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com, "Dean S" <dean@...> wrote:
>
> Matt,
>
> Where you around for the “thin the herd” thread???  That should go down in
history like this one.
>
> I heard rumors from AIC about Crisp and how is assumed association with FLI is
hurting them in the market.
>
>
>
> From: Matts Sporre
> Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 2011 4:34 PM
> To: FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [FLI_Imaging_Systems] Re: My opinon
>
>
>
>
> Rouzbeh,
>
>
> You have my support and I could add to the list, but you already made your
point.
>
>
> No other group I listen in to have the frequency of statements like the ones
you listed.
>
>
> BR
> Matts
>
>
>
>
> 7 nov 2011 kl. 23:59 skrev "roozbeh_bid" <rbidshahri@...>:
>
>
>
>
>
>   "it is unusual it doesn’t happen very often Jeanette"
>
>   I have to point out the contradiction here.
>   Unfortunately we have to bear examples like these in the past few days:
>
>   "It seems I have to tell people this simple thing about 50 times per year"
>   "here are doing when you do dumb things"
>   "I am just trying to teach you that obviously don’t understand"
>   "of putting garish oversaturated crap up on the internet and calling it a
â€"pretty pictureâ€"
>   "Perhaps it is a cultural thing? I’ve certainly noticed a
correlation."
>   "I did lump it into a growing set that I collectively call crap"ö
>   "ignorant teaching the beginners utter rubbish"
>
>   I doubt anybody will appreciate these comments whatever your
intentions/reasons specially the borderline racial ones!
>
>   As you can see these have already had a detrimental effect on Jeanette.
>
>   I do agree with one line though:
>
>   "you can do what you want including destroying faint reflection….."
>
>   --- In FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com, <rdcrisp@> wrote:
>   >
>   > it is unusual
>   >
>   > it doesn’t happen very often Jeanette
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   > From: nettielamb63
>   > Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 2:12 PM
>   > To: FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com
>   > Subject: [FLI_Imaging_Systems] My opinon
>   >
>   >
>   > I joined this group because I will soon be levelling up from my unmodded
DSLR.
>   > I was recommended a FLI by Paul Haese and Mike Sidonio.
>   > But if the recent "crap" I've witnessed in this group is the sort of abuse
I'm to expect when I start posting my first images, well, I'd rather buy a
different brand of camera just so I can join a support group where I know I
won't be dumped on for processing an image to my own taste.
>   > You've lost me here and FLI have lost a customer.
>   > cs
>   > Jeanette Dunphy
>   >
>

#9768 From: "nettielamb63" <nettielamb63@...>
Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 4:54 am
Subject: Re: My opinon
nettielamb63
Send Email Send Email
 
Ok, I'll bite.

If I join a forum I expect to be spoken to respectfully.
I can take constructive criticism, in fact I crave it, it's the only way to move
forward and learn.
But I will NOT tolerate condescension nor any form of abusive comments towards
myself or my work.
And I should NOT be expected to just "deal with it" either.
Already I've been told I've "failed the intelligence test".LOL
You don't even know me Mr Crisp. Why did you say that?
Are you so scared of me that you immediately went into the defensive? I'm no
threat to anyone, I assure you. I'm just a country girl who loves Astronomy and
Astro Imaging.
In my 7 years in this hobby I've managed to become one of the most highly
respected female imagers in Australia. I've had my share of success. I've been
published, not only in Australia, but also the UK
(a front cover of "The Astronomer" last year, and back cover this year) and had
an article commissioned and published in the US mag Astro Technology Today. Most
recently I was short listed for the ROG awards.
One must assume it would take some form of intelligence to have achieve this
much in just a few years.
I would appreciate it if you would keep such negative remarks to yourself in the
future as far as I'm concerned. thank you very much.


--- In FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com, "nettielamb63" <nettielamb63@...>
wrote:
>
> I joined this group because I will soon be levelling up from my unmodded DSLR.
> I was recommended a FLI by Paul Haese and Mike Sidonio.
> But if the recent "crap" I've witnessed in this group is the sort of abuse I'm
to expect when I start posting my first images, well, I'd rather buy a different
brand of camera just so I can join a support group where I know I won't be
dumped on for processing an image to my own taste.
> You've lost me here and FLI have lost a customer.
> cs
> Jeanette Dunphy
>

#9769 From: Richard Crisp <rdcrisp@...>
Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 5:06 am
Subject: Re: Re: My opinion
rdcrisp
Send Email Send Email
 
Thanks for stepping up to the plate, Chuck.

You're behind the times on the marketing idea: Puckett of Apogee was overheard making precisely that pitch at NEAF three years ago

And the harvest sown by those running around without their noses on their faces are hundreds of hours of valuable imaging time lost waiting for temperature stabilization (half hour thermal slews) all the while being told the reason for the singular cooling behavior was concern of reliability of the chamber seals as opposed to what their owner has dubbed "destructive testing" for the thermal behavior of all non Apogee cameras

It is utterly amazing that their customer base buys that poppycock when it ought to be abundantly obvious to even the most sleepy observer that there is NOT
a mountain of destroyed cameras that cool down in the customary five to seven minutes

Also to the astute observer the fact that a $2000 cooling option available from that
mendacity-challenged vendor cools the SAME chamber like others do should reveal that there's another reason for the singular behavior:

If you know anything about thermal design you know that putting a sheet of metal behind the radiator of your car is likely to cause overheating, yet the wizards at Apogee do the moral equivalent by placing their heatsink cooling fans in such a configuration (blowing straight down the heatsink fins) so as to cause stagnation of the airflow in their standard cooling design

If you then pump a lot of heat into the TEC system you simply cannot remove it fast enough and thermal runaway results.

They have no explanation for how in the $2000 option case cooling faster is 'reliable' while using the same chamber and sensor in the standard case and cooling fast is 'destructive testing'

Obviously there's a glaring inconsistency that is obvious to all but those that have drunk their Koolaid.

There's an example of that integrity thing you raised..


From: chuck <goalt00@...>;
To: <FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com>;
Subject: [FLI_Imaging_Systems] Re: My opinion
Sent: Wed, Nov 9, 2011 2:24:50 AM

 



Statements like this are what keeps me coming back to FLI when I feel the need to upgrade imaging equipment. I really appreciate the honest and straight forward way they do business. I have been lied to by just about all of the other cam makers out there. One even took full payment up front and NEVER delivered the product. Dealing with FLI is like breathing fresh air again.

Richard doesn't work for FLI and to not consider purchasing from them because of his statements is like cutting your nose off despite your face. Equipment should be judged based on specs not what people discuss on user groups.

In ways I can understand why Richard is a bit harsh in his statements. He has an extensive technical background and understands why things need to be done a certain way. Now imagine if you were him and year after year you had to keep explaining the same basic ideas over and over again. Then toss in a bunch of people who will deny to the bitter end that what you are saying is even truthful. Yes maybe he could tone it down a bit sometimes but put into the above context I can understand his frustration.

Maybe this can all be put into a new marketing ploy for the other companies. Buy our equipment over FLI's because you don't want Richard Crisp showing up at your house to personally attack you and forget about the fact that it's an inferior product. Lame I know but I wouldn't put it past them.

Chuck

--- In FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com, "Jim" <jmoronski-ng@...> wrote:
>
> Matt, Rouzbeh, et al.,
>
> The uncensored and non-moderated policy on this group is a result of FLI's (my) desire to not moderate or censor its forum. FLI does not have the manpower to do so. If we did this, we would end up with a long lag between released messages. You see this already when images are posted and I have to release them. We could hire someone to do this for us (you). I would then raise the prices on our products to pay this person's salary and benefits. This benefits nobody.
>
> We would then have to decide "offensive" or "constructive". That would be very subjective. That would likely result in posters being made upset. Just the opposite policy of what we have now would likely result in the same amount of pain for FLI. Furthermore, it would definitely squelch debate and science as people would be afraid to tick off the moderator.
>
> That being said, we expose the nature of our competitors' groups. Their groups are locked down tighter than bank vault. If we had the same policy, it would be easy for us to adopt or perceived to have adopted a screening policy that would prohibit any message from being posted that seemed critical of FLI's products or even mentioned our competitors'. It certainly would make my life easier if nobody, in an open forum, discussed what would be, in open debate, viewed as a product defect or deficiency. Imagine the QSI vs FLI debate on any other forum. You all know there was no interference by FLI on this. All of you know you can bring up anything, be it positive or negative, without repercussion from FLI.
>
> FLI delivers the best products and world class service. They are not without flaws or deficiencies, but they are the best. To provide an on-point example, look at the current CCDSoft discussion going on. I am the FLI software guy. If I were a moderator of convenience, like our competitors', that would never have made it to the group. Neither would the "which filters are better" discussion, "halos", etc...
>
> This group has some vocal members. Some fly off the handle and say things they shouldn't. Seriously, nobody should be told their images look like crap. That was out of line. But, those comments can be ignored or self-censored. If you don't like what you hear, then hit the delete key. This is no different than the television. These same people, more often than not, provide valuable technical knowledge to the group. I have been chastised hard and long for not banning certain members. Some hate me for taking this stand. And, yes Dean, we likely have lost business as a result of this. I have been told as much. I would rather lose business than fall on my principles. Squelching speech is not me.
>
> If this prevents you from buying a product from us, I believe you should reconsider. Think of this as a strength, not weakness. Just remember that whenever you need help or have a question and FLI isn't available or your question is beyond the scope of what FLI provides, you might get help and what you need. You will also get information that has not been screened or adjusted to/for FLI's taste. Just look over the last few years of the things that have been covered on this group. Imagine what the field would be like without it.
>
> Regards,
> Jim Moronski
> FLI Yahoo! Groups Moderator
> Finger Lakes Instrumentation, LLC
>


#9770 From: "Greg" <bradgregley10@...>
Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 6:32 am
Subject: Re: Please show respect to others!
bradgregley10
Send Email Send Email
 
What projects are you working on Jim?

I'd like to know the upcoming products FLI is planning.

Best,

Greg.

--- In FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com, "Jim" <jmoronski-ng@...> wrote:
>
>
> All,
>
> Show respect to everyone on the group! This group exists to promote the
> hobby and the science behind the hobby. People should not be afraid to
> post their images, techniques, etc... and any criticisms should be
> positive and constructive. This group is unmoderated and is not heavily
> monitored by FLI. This is because FLI believes that everyone should act
> like adults and has faith in its customer base that, even if
> disagreements start or someone says something that is either
> inappropriate or is taken as inappropriate, it is handled in an
> appropriate way.
>
> We have cameras and accessories to design and build. We do not have the
> time to moderate every post. Furthermore, we also don't want to squelch
> reasonable and constructive debate with the time it takes to moderate
> and approve messages or the fear of censorship.
>
> Regards,
> Jim Moronski
> Finger Lakes Instrumentation, LLC
>

#9771 From: "Greg" <bradgregley10@...>
Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 6:33 am
Subject: Re: An RBI question for Richard,
bradgregley10
Send Email Send Email
 
That's good news Jim.

Greg.

--- In FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com, Jim Moronski <jmoronski-ng@...>
wrote:
>
> Plug-ins are currently being written for CCDSoft and TheSkyX. Betas
> should be posted to the group before the end of the year. I know this
> has been said before, but the development is right now and is active.
>
> -Jim
>
> On 11/8/2011 5:10 PM, rdcrisp@... wrote:
> >
> >
> > Ditch Bisque and use Maxim
> > I suspect the only reason you use CCDSOFT is because it came free with
> > an SBIG camera.
> > Since you probably ditched the clearly inferior SBIG product, I
> > recommend doing the same with the clearly deficient BISQUE software.
> > Clearly deficient in the sense that it doesn’t permit you to use the
> > features built into the camera.
> > *From:* Olivier <mailto:olivierfp@...>
> > *Sent:* Monday, November 07, 2011 7:01 PM
> > *To:* FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com
> > <mailto:FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com>
> > *Subject:* [FLI_Imaging_Systems] An RBI question for Richard,
> >
> > Hi,
> > I use CCDSoft with an ML16803 and do not have a way to activate the NIR
> > flood. I was wondering if using light from an el flat screen could
> > achieve the same purpose? It may take a higher intensity and longer to
> > reach the area where the traps are, but could this be a workable
> > technique? The laser light RBI slide in your SPIE paper seems to
> > indicate it could, but I am not the expert here.
> > Regards
> > Olivier
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

#9772 From: "topcat4445" <topcat4445@...>
Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 6:40 am
Subject: Re: CCDSoft & FLI
topcat4445
Send Email Send Email
 
Yes Jim ....thanks!  I find CCDSoft has a few advantages when using CCDAutoPilot
compared with Maxim.

Cheers,
Tim

--- In FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com, "Greg" <bradgregley10@...> wrote:
>
> That's good news Jim.
>
> Greg.
>
> --- In FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com, Jim Moronski <jmoronski-ng@>
wrote:
> >
> > Plug-ins are currently being written for CCDSoft and TheSkyX. Betas
> > should be posted to the group before the end of the year. I know this
> > has been said before, but the development is right now and is active.
> >
> > -Jim
> >
> > On 11/8/2011 5:10 PM, rdcrisp@ wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Ditch Bisque and use Maxim
> > > I suspect the only reason you use CCDSOFT is because it came free with
> > > an SBIG camera.
> > > Since you probably ditched the clearly inferior SBIG product, I
> > > recommend doing the same with the clearly deficient BISQUE software.
> > > Clearly deficient in the sense that it doesn’t permit you to use the
> > > features built into the camera.
> > > *From:* Olivier <mailto:olivierfp@>
> > > *Sent:* Monday, November 07, 2011 7:01 PM
> > > *To:* FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com
> > > <mailto:FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com>
> > > *Subject:* [FLI_Imaging_Systems] An RBI question for Richard,
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > > I use CCDSoft with an ML16803 and do not have a way to activate the NIR
> > > flood. I was wondering if using light from an el flat screen could
> > > achieve the same purpose? It may take a higher intensity and longer to
> > > reach the area where the traps are, but could this be a workable
> > > technique? The laser light RBI slide in your SPIE paper seems to
> > > indicate it could, but I am not the expert here.
> > > Regards
> > > Olivier
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>

#9773 From: "bakersfieldbiker" <fblue@...>
Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 7:41 am
Subject: Re: CCDSoft & FLI
bakersfieldb...
Send Email Send Email
 
HI Time,
What advantages are those? I use Maxim with CCDAutoPilot, so I am curious.
Floyd

--- In FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com, "topcat4445" <topcat4445@...> wrote:
>
> Yes Jim ....thanks!  I find CCDSoft has a few advantages when using
CCDAutoPilot compared with Maxim.
>
> Cheers,
> Tim
>
> --- In FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com, "Greg" <bradgregley10@> wrote:
> >
> > That's good news Jim.
> >
> > Greg.
> >
> > --- In FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com, Jim Moronski <jmoronski-ng@>
wrote:
> > >
> > > Plug-ins are currently being written for CCDSoft and TheSkyX. Betas
> > > should be posted to the group before the end of the year. I know this
> > > has been said before, but the development is right now and is active.
> > >
> > > -Jim
> > >
> > > On 11/8/2011 5:10 PM, rdcrisp@ wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Ditch Bisque and use Maxim
> > > > I suspect the only reason you use CCDSOFT is because it came free with
> > > > an SBIG camera.
> > > > Since you probably ditched the clearly inferior SBIG product, I
> > > > recommend doing the same with the clearly deficient BISQUE software.
> > > > Clearly deficient in the sense that it doesn’t permit you to use the
> > > > features built into the camera.
> > > > *From:* Olivier <mailto:olivierfp@>
> > > > *Sent:* Monday, November 07, 2011 7:01 PM
> > > > *To:* FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com
> > > > <mailto:FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com>
> > > > *Subject:* [FLI_Imaging_Systems] An RBI question for Richard,
> > > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > > I use CCDSoft with an ML16803 and do not have a way to activate the NIR
> > > > flood. I was wondering if using light from an el flat screen could
> > > > achieve the same purpose? It may take a higher intensity and longer to
> > > > reach the area where the traps are, but could this be a workable
> > > > technique? The laser light RBI slide in your SPIE paper seems to
> > > > indicate it could, but I am not the expert here.
> > > > Regards
> > > > Olivier
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

#9774 From: Matts Sporre <groups@...>
Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 8:35 am
Subject: Re: Re: My opinion
mattssporre
Send Email Send Email
 
Hi Jim,

I def understand the difficulties related to censoring and I actually do not favour censoring by a single person. That can be missused.

For example, the digital astro group or the CGE group, works without censoring. Or rather there is some sort of self censoring, or maybe restraint to use offensive comments is a better way to put it. It works by itself so why should it not work here?

BR
Matts



9 nov 2011 kl. 00:59 skrev "Jim" <jmoronski-ng@...>:

 

Matt, Rouzbeh, et al.,

The uncensored and non-moderated policy on this group is a result of FLI's (my) desire to not moderate or censor its forum. FLI does not have the manpower to do so. If we did this, we would end up with a long lag between released messages. You see this already when images are posted and I have to release them. We could hire someone to do this for us (you). I would then raise the prices on our products to pay this person's salary and benefits. This benefits nobody.

We would then have to decide "offensive" or "constructive". That would be very subjective. That would likely result in posters being made upset. Just the opposite policy of what we have now would likely result in the same amount of pain for FLI. Furthermore, it would definitely squelch debate and science as people would be afraid to tick off the moderator.

That being said, we expose the nature of our competitors' groups. Their groups are locked down tighter than bank vault. If we had the same policy, it would be easy for us to adopt or perceived to have adopted a screening policy that would prohibit any message from being posted that seemed critical of FLI's products or even mentioned our competitors'. It certainly would make my life easier if nobody, in an open forum, discussed what would be, in open debate, viewed as a product defect or deficiency. Imagine the QSI vs FLI debate on any other forum. You all know there was no interference by FLI on this. All of you know you can bring up anything, be it positive or negative, without repercussion from FLI.

FLI delivers the best products and world class service. They are not without flaws or deficiencies, but they are the best. To provide an on-point example, look at the current CCDSoft discussion going on. I am the FLI software guy. If I were a moderator of convenience, like our competitors', that would never have made it to the group. Neither would the "which filters are better" discussion, "halos", etc...

This group has some vocal members. Some fly off the handle and say things they shouldn't. Seriously, nobody should be told their images look like crap. That was out of line. But, those comments can be ignored or self-censored. If you don't like what you hear, then hit the delete key. This is no different than the television. These same people, more often than not, provide valuable technical knowledge to the group. I have been chastised hard and long for not banning certain members. Some hate me for taking this stand. And, yes Dean, we likely have lost business as a result of this. I have been told as much. I would rather lose business than fall on my principles. Squelching speech is not me.

If this prevents you from buying a product from us, I believe you should reconsider. Think of this as a strength, not weakness. Just remember that whenever you need help or have a question and FLI isn't available or your question is beyond the scope of what FLI provides, you might get help and what you need. You will also get information that has not been screened or adjusted to/for FLI's taste. Just look over the last few years of the things that have been covered on this group. Imagine what the field would be like without it.

Regards,
Jim Moronski
FLI Yahoo! Groups Moderator
Finger Lakes Instrumentation, LLC


#9775 From: <rdcrisp@...>
Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 11:52 am
Subject: Re: Re: My opinon
rdcrisp
Send Email Send Email
 
Now wait a minute: I did not say you failed the intelligence test. I said if
you went and bought a demonstrably inferior product solely on the basis of a
perceived insult that you have failed the intelligence test.

If you can’t see the distinction in your allegation versus my restatement, I
suggest you read it again until you can.

I think it is great that you are such a gifted imager and applaud your
achievements.

Since we are getting to know each other, here’s a bit of my background:

I developed the tricolor emission line imaging method in broad use beginning
6 months after I began imaging in 2000 (
http://www.narrowbandimaging.com/incoming/264861.jpg ). I wrote the
definitive article on the subject in the Aug 2005 S&T
(http://www.narrowbandimaging.com/tricolor_emission_line_imaging_crisp_page.htm
  ).

I also have published peer-reviewed papers in SPIE journals on the topic of
Residual Bulk Image, these are professional journals that cater to the world
of image sensor and optics design engineers. I would be willing to wager
that my paper on RBI I presented at the SPIE’s “Electronic Imaging Science
and Technology Symposium” conference in January of 2009 was the only such
paper given on the basis of HOBBY work...  (
http://www.narrowbandimaging.com/rbi_paper_crisp_page.htm )

Most recently I had an expanded version of the paper published in the SPIE’s
“Journal of Electronic Imaging” (
http://www.narrowbandimaging.com/incoming/033006_1_1314293318_1.pdf )

I also published a non-technical version of it for S&T and it appeared in
the August 2011 issue

I was an invited speaker at Image Sensors Europe in March of this year,
which is a professional conference with leading researchers from the major
image sensor companies (Kodak, E2V, Dalsa, Fairchild, Omnivision etc) and
several major European universities speaking or in attendance
(http://www.narrowbandimaging.com/incoming/Image_sensors_europe_crisp.ppsx ).
And I have been shunned/boycotted and banned from every major astroimaging
conference because three or four vendors refuse to participate if I am
permitted to speak or even attend because they know they are selling
overpriced junk and I have never been shy about pointing it out. I don't
care what people say or think about me. I don't need their approval to
function in my career or to feel good about myself. I deal in reality and
that is that.

I have been a semiconductor technologist for over 35 years and am the CTO of
a major silicon valley semiconductor technology intellectual property
company and have over 19 issued US patents and have filed over 20 in the
past year and a half on recent work.

and I began my career in electrical engineering by designing the CPUs in the
first three generations of Macintosh computers.

So I know what I am talking about when it comes to the technology and I
simply don't suffer any fools, of which this hobby is laden to the gills. I
don't have time to beat around the bush, so I just say it the way I see it.
I travel nearly continuously in Asia promoting the technology we are
developing and making deals with leading semiconductor and computer
manufacturers. I post in this group and a couple of others because I hate to
see bad information propagated and when I know the  truth I speak up. It
does no one any good to walk around believing things that just aren't true.

If you want to know something I am  happy to help if I can, and I cite
scholarly references where applicable; I don't just wave my hands and say
"because I say so" as is the modus operandi in most of the forums.

Before my work in RBI people just "dealt with it". Now the better camera
companies all have implemented the method I outlined in my papers, which is
what flew on the Cassini and Galileo probes.

I have taught many imagers how to characterize their cameras with the Photon
Transfer method (learn full well, gain, read noise, linearity, photoresponse
non uniformity and dark signal non-uniformity when using the basic method)
( http://www.narrowbandimaging.com/ptc_method_wsp2009_page.htm ) so when one
of us that I taught says what the read noise is, you can take it to the
bank. BS is not a commodity I carry in stock; you can find plenty of that
elsewhere.

And in the course of doing all of that, I've serendipitously discovered four
planetary nebulae, all of which were confirmed by spectroscopic analysis at
WIYN and were covered in papers written by a professional astronomer (Dr.
George Jacoby of WIYN). One of my early tricolor multispectral emission line
images even appeared on the cover of a graduate textbook on star formation
written by Dr Norbert Shulz of MIT, who is a member of the Spitzer research
team ( http://space.mit.edu/home/nss/ )

Nice to know you, Jeannette!
-Richard








From: nettielamb63
Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 2011 8:54 PM
To: FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [FLI_Imaging_Systems] Re: My opinon




Ok, I'll bite.

If I join a forum I expect to be spoken to respectfully.
I can take constructive criticism, in fact I crave it, it's the only way to
move forward and learn.
But I will NOT tolerate condescension nor any form of abusive comments
towards myself or my work.
And I should NOT be expected to just "deal with it" either.
Already I've been told I've "failed the intelligence test".LOL
You don't even know me Mr Crisp. Why did you say that?
Are you so scared of me that you immediately went into the defensive? I'm no
threat to anyone, I assure you. I'm just a country girl who loves Astronomy
and Astro Imaging.
In my 7 years in this hobby I've managed to become one of the most highly
respected female imagers in Australia. I've had my share of success. I've
been published, not only in Australia, but also the UK
(a front cover of "The Astronomer" last year, and back cover this year) and
had an article commissioned and published in the US mag Astro Technology
Today. Most recently I was short listed for the ROG awards.
One must assume it would take some form of intelligence to have achieve this
much in just a few years.
I would appreciate it if you would keep such negative remarks to yourself in
the future as far as I'm concerned. thank you very much.

--- In mailto:FLI_Imaging_Systems%40yahoogroups.com, "nettielamb63"
<nettielamb63@...> wrote:
>
> I joined this group because I will soon be levelling up from my unmodded
> DSLR.
> I was recommended a FLI by Paul Haese and Mike Sidonio.
> But if the recent "crap" I've witnessed in this group is the sort of abuse
> I'm to expect when I start posting my first images, well, I'd rather buy a
> different brand of camera just so I can join a support group where I know
> I won't be dumped on for processing an image to my own taste.
> You've lost me here and FLI have lost a customer.
> cs
> Jeanette Dunphy
>

#9776 From: "Michael" <m.sidonio@...>
Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 12:09 pm
Subject: Re: My opinon
strongmanmik...
Send Email Send Email
 
HI'a Netti!

I see you've been introduced LOL :P

It's true what Jeanette is saying and she would be a very worthy user of an FLI
camera

Don't let Richard's forum tourettes get up your nose, he grows on you in time
and above all is a VERY helpful individual! You will likely come to love him XX

Mike



--- In FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com, "nettielamb63" <nettielamb63@...>
wrote:
>
> Ok, I'll bite.
>
> If I join a forum I expect to be spoken to respectfully.
> I can take constructive criticism, in fact I crave it, it's the only way to
move forward and learn.
> But I will NOT tolerate condescension nor any form of abusive comments towards
myself or my work.
> And I should NOT be expected to just "deal with it" either.
> Already I've been told I've "failed the intelligence test".LOL
> You don't even know me Mr Crisp. Why did you say that?
> Are you so scared of me that you immediately went into the defensive? I'm no
threat to anyone, I assure you. I'm just a country girl who loves Astronomy and
Astro Imaging.
> In my 7 years in this hobby I've managed to become one of the most highly
respected female imagers in Australia. I've had my share of success. I've been
published, not only in Australia, but also the UK
> (a front cover of "The Astronomer" last year, and back cover this year) and
had an article commissioned and published in the US mag Astro Technology Today.
Most recently I was short listed for the ROG awards.
> One must assume it would take some form of intelligence to have achieve this
much in just a few years.
> I would appreciate it if you would keep such negative remarks to yourself in
the future as far as I'm concerned. thank you very much.
>
>
> --- In FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com, "nettielamb63" <nettielamb63@>
wrote:
> >
> > I joined this group because I will soon be levelling up from my unmodded
DSLR.
> > I was recommended a FLI by Paul Haese and Mike Sidonio.
> > But if the recent "crap" I've witnessed in this group is the sort of abuse
I'm to expect when I start posting my first images, well, I'd rather buy a
different brand of camera just so I can join a support group where I know I
won't be dumped on for processing an image to my own taste.
> > You've lost me here and FLI have lost a customer.
> > cs
> > Jeanette Dunphy
> >
>

#9777 From: "Michael" <m.sidonio@...>
Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 12:15 pm
Subject: Re: Here is my impression of a non crap LRGB image ;^)
strongmanmik...
Send Email Send Email
 
That looks fine to me Floyd because the colours look balanced, the stars have a
shine to them and it is an interesting mixed field :-)

Mike

--- In FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com, "bakersfieldbiker" <fblue@...>
wrote:
>
>
http://www.astrophotogallery.org/floyd-27s-pics/p8431-ic-1795-lrgb28reprocessed-\
29.html
>
> I am attempting to reprocess my data with more control and respect for nature.
My colors are more muted, but still present in abundance. Details are brought
out as fully as my data allows and contrast between colors and emmissions I try
to preserve.
>
> I would like honest opinions, positive or negative on this. If you dislike it,
please explain why, the same if you do like it.
>
> Honestly, I am trying to learn to do the best I can with LRGB and produce
photos that are pleasing and yet still maintain the integrity of the data and
image.
> Floyd
>

#9778 From: "roozbeh_bid" <rbidshahri@...>
Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 1:46 pm
Subject: Re: My opinion
roozbeh_bid
Send Email Send Email
 
I must agree that FLI cameras are great and the customer service I have
experienced was the best when I have had problems.

I also agree that censorship and banning doesnt have an overall positive
outcome in almost all situations.

Its seems Richard has in depth technical knowledge in this field, and has helped
a lot of people in the past including myself.

However, I also know that people, no matter who, will not respond positively to
harsh disrespectful words, that is human nature!

I am sure more experienced members can have a great positive impact (and genuine
respect) by not using a cannon to kill a fly.

Lets lighten the mood if we can folks  and share this wonderful groupK..

After all it is a hobby we should enjoy (for me at least)

All the Best,
Rouzbeh,



--- In FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com, "chuck" <goalt00@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> Statements like this are what keeps me coming back to FLI when I feel the need
to upgrade imaging equipment. I really appreciate the honest and straight
forward way they do business. I have been lied to by just about all of the other
cam makers out there. One even took full payment up front and NEVER delivered
the product. Dealing with FLI is like breathing fresh air again.
>
> Richard doesn't work for FLI and to not consider purchasing from them because
of his statements is like cutting your nose off despite your face. Equipment
should be judged based on specs not what people discuss on user groups.
>
> In ways I can understand why Richard is a bit harsh in his statements. He has
an extensive technical background and understands why things need to be done a
certain way. Now imagine if you were him and year after year you had to keep
explaining the same basic ideas over and over again. Then toss in a bunch of
people who will deny to the bitter end that what you are saying is even
truthful. Yes maybe he could tone it down a bit sometimes but put into the above
context I can understand his frustration.
>
> Maybe this can all be put into a new marketing ploy for the other companies.
Buy our equipment over FLI's because you don't want Richard Crisp showing up at
your house to personally attack you and forget about the fact that it's an
inferior product. Lame I know but I wouldn't put it past them.
>
> Chuck
>
>
>
>
> --- In FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com, "Jim" <jmoronski-ng@> wrote:
> >
> > Matt, Rouzbeh, et al.,
> >
> > The uncensored and non-moderated policy on this group is a result of FLI's
(my) desire to not moderate or censor its forum. FLI does not have the manpower
to do so. If we did this, we would end up with a long lag between released
messages. You see this already when images are posted and I have to release
them. We could hire someone to do this for us (you). I would then raise the
prices on our products to pay this person's salary and benefits. This benefits
nobody.
> >
> > We would then have to decide "offensive" or "constructive". That would be
very subjective. That would likely result in posters being made upset. Just the
opposite policy of what we have now would likely result in the same amount of
pain for FLI. Furthermore, it would definitely squelch debate and science as
people would be afraid to tick off the moderator.
> >
> > That being said, we expose the nature of our competitors' groups. Their
groups are locked down tighter than bank vault. If we had the same policy, it
would be easy for us to adopt or perceived to have adopted a screening policy
that would prohibit any message from being posted that seemed critical of FLI's
products or even mentioned our competitors'. It certainly would make my life
easier if nobody, in an open forum, discussed what would be, in open debate,
viewed as a product defect or deficiency. Imagine the QSI vs FLI debate on any
other forum. You all know there was no interference by FLI on this. All of you
know you can bring up anything, be it positive or negative, without repercussion
from FLI.
> >
> > FLI delivers the best products and world class service. They are not without
flaws or deficiencies, but they are the best. To provide an on-point example,
look at the current CCDSoft discussion going on. I am the FLI software guy. If I
were a moderator of convenience, like our competitors', that would never have
made it to the group. Neither would the "which filters are better" discussion,
"halos", etc...
> >
> > This group has some vocal members. Some fly off the handle and say things
they shouldn't. Seriously, nobody should be told their images look like crap.
That was out of line. But, those comments can be ignored or self-censored. If
you don't like what you hear, then hit the delete key. This is no different than
the television. These same people, more often than not, provide valuable
technical knowledge to the group. I have been chastised hard and long for not
banning certain members. Some hate me for taking this stand. And, yes Dean, we
likely have lost business as a result of this. I have been told as much. I would
rather lose business than fall on my principles. Squelching speech is not me.
> >
> > If this prevents you from buying a product from us, I believe you should
reconsider. Think of this as a strength, not weakness. Just remember that
whenever you need help or have a question and FLI isn't available or your
question is beyond the scope of what FLI provides, you might get help and what
you need. You will also get information that has not been screened or adjusted
to/for FLI's taste. Just look over the last few years of the things that have
been covered on this group. Imagine what the field would be like without it.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Jim Moronski
> > FLI Yahoo! Groups Moderator
> > Finger Lakes Instrumentation, LLC
> >
>

#9779 From: Tim Khan <timkhan@...>
Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 2:33 pm
Subject: Re: Re: My opinion and mine...
timkhan
Send Email Send Email
 
I will say: Sometimes things can fall thru the cracks , however,  I never had but exemplary service from FLI:
 
2006/7 I purchased a PL16803, First had a Kodak sensor issue with the cover slip, too many dust donuts due to the some coatings process or bubbles in the cover (not a FLI problem), and the camera cooled so good that I had a dew problem on the exterior chamber window!
    FLI installed a Dew heather, and replaced the sensor at no expense.
 
Still had a problem on very humid nights (imaging either 6ft from the Atlantic or deep in the everglades), after several hours of use dew would form in the early morning hours.
    Again FLI added a second heater, and I believe they added the anti RBI LEDs and I paid only for shipping.
 
ML8300 had the CCD window issue.
    FLI changed out at no expense, I only paid for shipping. 
 
Upgraded from a PL16803 to a ML16803, yes an upgrade because, over a 3 year period FLI makes continual improvements of the circuit design, my current ML16803 has lower noise than the first generation PL16803. Furthermore, it almost cools as good as the PL (within 5C).
 
Forgot to mention I was able to order a customized ML8300, having the same back-focus as my ML16803 and 4 readout modes.
 
Recently, I plugged the wrong wall transformer into the my CFW and blew the board, FLI repaired it a reasonable cost.
 
FLI does listen to real valid suggestions from their users, Richard has provided his technical knowledge which paved the way to providing Anti-RBI hardware and software. Also, Jim has implemented some tweaks and binning on the Anti-RBI MaximDL plugin as per my suggestions.
 
 
 
 
From: Southern Stars Observatories <jcpelle@...>
To: FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, November 8, 2011 8:25 PM
Subject: RE: [FLI_Imaging_Systems] Re: My opinion and mine...

 
> The uncensored and non-moderated policy on this ....

Jim, this is absolutely false and I may prove it.

It is forbidden to tell the truth about difficulties encountered with your products
and your totally deficient support.

You delivered to us a PL9000, at full price, that was barely in alpha test mode, we
had failures after failures, and your only proposal was that we spend at least 2000
USD for a camera a few weeks old. You refused our proposal that was at a very
minimal cost for you as well as for us. And years after it is not yet fixed.

You have time to moderate the list, but not to answer about what you did with the
money (thousands of USD) we sent several years ago for a filter wheel and a set of
Astrodon filters never received.

There is no way to believe what you tell. 48 hours after we had *privately* reported
ice crystals on our CCD (on a some 100 days camera) you wrote on the FLI list "FLI
cameras never leak"! What a lie!

The only allowed critics on your list are these made by your sponsored hit man
against all your competitors and some providers he had issues for reasons not even
related to technical issues, but personal issues. You may not, in good faith ignore
that.

But there is worse, you let (and certainly encourage) him to made claims you
perfectly know are false, just because they serve your interests.

I had only false promises after false promises from FLI.

> Their groups are locked down tighter than bank vault.

Absolutely false, it is just brainwashing, but you are an expert in that matter.
There is not a week without, on some of these groups, people reporting issues,
And not only they may be freely discussed, but they are solved on the contrary of
what I see with FLI, where the one complaining is immediately told to contact
off-list and moderated.

> FLI delivers the best products and world class service. They are not without
> flaws or deficiencies, but they are the best.

The best..., it is just commercial claims, you have yet to prove it to me and not by
an additional cost of more than 2000 USD.

> This group has some vocal members.

Why the plural? There is only your sponsored guy.

> These same people, more often than not, provide valuable technical
> knowledge to the group.

Add 'biased' please.

> Squelching speech is not me.

I am waiting to see that mail on your list

> Jim Moronski
> FLI Yahoo! Groups Moderator
****************

That is the best one! The group is not moderated, but there is a moderator!

One more lie from you, Jim, sorry.

If you want an extended list of your lies and these of Greg, ask me, just allow me
to use your mails.

Now I will appreciate if I may use my PL9000. All the issues you may not ignore
Where well inside the warranty period (a few months), and you were told in time.

I want these issues fixed, if you are not courageous enough to publish that mail, it
doesn't matters.

And BTW, point me to only one message to the list in which what I wrote was not the
truth.
You moderate me just because I was telling the truth about the failures of your
products and services.

It is a surprising implementation of free speech.

Jean-Claude PELLE
Southern Stars Observatories.




#9780 From: "kjcphoto2001" <kjcstudio@...>
Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 6:16 pm
Subject: Re: CCDSoft & FLI
kjcphoto2001
Send Email Send Email
 
One advantage that CCDSoft offered for me was Direct Guide of the ME Mount.  The
cable from the guide camera to the mount is eliminated.  Guide corrections are
sent through the USB cable to the mount.  Not possible in my case with Maxim.

The other advantage is I already had 2 copies of CCDSoft, one from purchase of
the mount and one from purchase of an SBIG 402 used as a guide camera.

--- In FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com, "bakersfieldbiker" <fblue@...>
wrote:
>
> HI Time,
> What advantages are those? I use Maxim with CCDAutoPilot, so I am curious.
> Floyd
>
> --- In FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com, "topcat4445" <topcat4445@> wrote:
> >
> > Yes Jim ....thanks!  I find CCDSoft has a few advantages when using
CCDAutoPilot compared with Maxim.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Tim
> >
> > --- In FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com, "Greg" <bradgregley10@> wrote:
> > >
> > > That's good news Jim.
> > >
> > > Greg.
> > >
> > > --- In FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com, Jim Moronski <jmoronski-ng@>
wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Plug-ins are currently being written for CCDSoft and TheSkyX. Betas
> > > > should be posted to the group before the end of the year. I know this
> > > > has been said before, but the development is right now and is active.
> > > >
> > > > -Jim
> > > >
> > > > On 11/8/2011 5:10 PM, rdcrisp@ wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Ditch Bisque and use Maxim
> > > > > I suspect the only reason you use CCDSOFT is because it came free with
> > > > > an SBIG camera.
> > > > > Since you probably ditched the clearly inferior SBIG product, I
> > > > > recommend doing the same with the clearly deficient BISQUE software.
> > > > > Clearly deficient in the sense that it doesn’t permit you to use the
> > > > > features built into the camera.
> > > > > *From:* Olivier <mailto:olivierfp@>
> > > > > *Sent:* Monday, November 07, 2011 7:01 PM
> > > > > *To:* FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com
> > > > > <mailto:FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com>
> > > > > *Subject:* [FLI_Imaging_Systems] An RBI question for Richard,
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > > I use CCDSoft with an ML16803 and do not have a way to activate the
NIR
> > > > > flood. I was wondering if using light from an el flat screen could
> > > > > achieve the same purpose? It may take a higher intensity and longer to
> > > > > reach the area where the traps are, but could this be a workable
> > > > > technique? The laser light RBI slide in your SPIE paper seems to
> > > > > indicate it could, but I am not the expert here.
> > > > > Regards
> > > > > Olivier
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

#9781 From: "Douglas B. George" <dg@...>
Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 7:15 pm
Subject: Re: Re: CCDSoft & FLI
maximccd
Send Email Send Email
 
On 2011-11-09 1:16 PM, kjcphoto2001 wrote:
> One advantage that CCDSoft offered for me was Direct Guide of the ME Mount.
The
> cable from the guide camera to the mount is eliminated. Guide corrections are
> sent through the USB cable to the mount. Not possible in my case with Maxim.

It is possible to ditch the cable using the Via Telescope method, if you turn on
the PulseGuide option in the TheSky-Controlled Telescope ASCOM driver.

Doug

--

Doug George
dgeorge@...

Diffraction Limited
Makers of Cyanogen Imaging Products
http://www.cyanogen.com/

100 Craig Henry Dr., Suite 202
Ottawa, Ontario,
Canada, K2G 5W3

Phone:    (613) 225-2732
Fax:      (613) 225-9688

#9782 From: "Wolfgang Promper" <wolfgang@...>
Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 7:46 pm
Subject: Re: Gresham's Law and garishly overprocessed images Re: Re: M33, bye bye Summer
ic2779
Send Email Send Email
 
Hello Richard
 
Although knowing what your intention was to speak out something like you did, I think you are wrong.
I´m not saying anything about the way you did it, because by now you should have noticed that it turned a lot of people off and puts a bad feeling on a beautifull hobby, and that´s just what it is for most of us.
 
Anyway I looked at Manuels M33 on a couple of different monitors now  and can´t find anything wrong about it.
The high res version might be a little bit on the sharp side but other than that it is a perfectly beautifull image with a variation in color not often seen and for sure not artificial.
If you look at the history of astronomical imaging enhancement of the raw data has always been done, just have a look at what David Malin did with unsharp masking and contrast enhancement, although sometimes “garish”
he brought us new views of galaxies and nebulas unseen before.
I also had a look at your M33 but that is not a good comparison for me, the raw data you have might be good but without wanting to be offensive I think we did better with film some 20 years ago.
In this case I have to ask what all the great equipment we have today is good for.
Integrity of data is one thing, important for sure, but getting the most out of your raw data is a major part and always was.
 
Wolfgang
 
 
Sent: Sunday, November 06, 2011 7:32 PM
Subject: Gresham's Law and garishly overprocessed images Re: [FLI_Imaging_Systems] Re: M33, bye bye Summer
 
 

I’m with you on the garish and oversaturated assessment
 
I personally despise overprocessed images and lately I seldom make comments on posted images because they fall into that category
So I’ve been not saying anything unless I have something nice to say
 
It seems that most overprocess; in some quarters that is the price of admission into the clique: either you use all the photoshop tricks or you are dogmeat
 
There are at lest two problems with garishly overprocessed images: one is that it fouls up perfectly good data that started out with scientific integrity. The second and far more significant issue is that it pollutes the mind and knowledge base with bad information and sets bad examples for what constitutes good data processing that maintains scientific and ethical validity.
 
The observation about Gresham’s Law causing a degradation in the quality of knowledge in the age of the Internet when any one can post anything about anything, irrespective of whether it it true or false has certainly lead to a diminution of the scientific integrity of astro-images
 
in order to be accepted as a “good” image you have to destroy any semblance of integrity with wavelets, high pass filters, deconvolution and piecing together composites  otherwise the group-think and group-comment is against you....
 
No thanks guys, you can keep it if that is what it takes to be in the gang
 
here’s a bit of academic wisdom on this topic for those that concern themselves more with societal issues than things or celebrities, television and sports:
 

Quoting:

“Source credibility is the key to distinguishing between information we should use and information we should dismiss. However, both credible and non-credible sources circulate in our current information economy. Expanding well beyond technology that which Boorstin could have conceived, in the 21st century the profusion of information is bewildering. The Internet has democratized the production of information and allowed everyone to participate in its creation and dissemination. These factors, that make the Internet a powerful means of disseminating good or credible information, are the same characteristics that allow for bad and misleading information to become widespread (Bates, Romina, Ahmed, & Hopson, 2006, p. 46).

Before the advent of the information age, the task of assessing credibility was much easier. Traditionally, information in print was executed by a whole host of professionals (journalists, professors, editors, peer-reviewers) ensuring quality of the information distributed. Since print information was time consuming and expensive, the dissemination of good information was much slower and hoarded by those who could afford it (universities, culture institutions, journal subscribers). As a corollary, bad information (non-credible information) was less ubiquitous. As a trade-off, less people were afforded the opportunity to a voice in a system that restricted publication to those with the means of production.

The inverse is true today; more people are afforded the opportunity to voice their opinion by publishing a Webpage online, but bad information is in heavier circulation. In his book, The Long Tail, Chris Anderson colorfully illustrates the information distribution on the Internet when he writes, “with probabilistic systems there is only a statistical level of quality, which is to say: some things will be great, some things will be mediocre, and some things will be absolutely crappy” (Anderson, 2006, p. 70). The Internet is not completely full of non-credible sources, just as it is not always authoritative or trustworthy. With a nod toward the power of mass collaboration and creation, Anderson states, “Give enough people the capacity to create, and invariably gems will emerge.” (Anderson, 2006, p. 126)

The unspoken issue, however, is that such gems may be buried under several tons of rocks and gravel. For every Webpage constructed by experts with extensively cited research, there are many more with little care for citation, grammatical correctness or facts. Currently, both are circulating on the marketplace of the Web with seemingly equally value. With information dissemination readily available for instant distribution through Web publishing, bad information obtained from a non-credible source is circulated back into the system almost as quickly as it is created. The Internet magnifies Giffen’s point that good and bad information will circulate together as if they are both good when the circulation itself does not exceed the demand. We are far from reaching our saturation point, as the number of blogs, Webpages and social networking sites increase on a daily basis. Again, this isn’t a problem depending on the information one is seeking, given that information quality must consider the user’s needs. At the same time, credibility is the crucial element of meta-information that all seekers of information should be using to assess whether the information they are finding is good or bad. With anyone given the ability to publish their ideas online, your chances of finding bad information in proportion to good information are fairly good. Yet, from accurate movie times to authoritative health information, people are seeking good information from qualified sources.”

 

 
 
 
Sent: Sunday, November 06, 2011 8:00 AM
Subject: [FLI_Imaging_Systems] Re: M33, bye bye Summer
 
 

M33 like pretty much every other spiral galaxy in the visible universe has a central bulge. Some are small, others are large, but every spiral galaxy has one. Just because the orientation of this galaxy and most other spirals are such that they cannot be clearly 'seen' doesn't mean it isn't there.

As to the image Mike is commenting upon, I find it equally oversaturated and somewhat garish, but that is just my opinion. I prefer the waft of a gentle breeze to a hurricane force wind.

--- In mailto:FLI_Imaging_Systems%40yahoogroups.com, Dvj <dvj@...> wrote:
>
> M33 does mot have a central bulge.
>
> J
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Nov 6, 2011, at 2:22 AM, "Michael" <m.sidonio@...> wrote:
>
> > Wow what a corker! Amazing result!
> >
> > The only thing I'd say is that, as is often the case when people present a bright galaxy like this, in the quest to reveal the inner core structures (which you have done beautifully) the larger core region is left too dull and unrealistically dim compared to the outer areas as far as dynamic range goes, making the galaxy look flat rather than having a bright glowing bulge in the core area.
> >
> > A minor point probably (and there is no law here) as the final result is still spectacular! :-)
> >
> > Gee there are some nice shots on your web site Manuel, that CDK17-Pl16803 combo is really singing!
> >
> > Mike
> >
> > --- In mailto:FLI_Imaging_Systems%40yahoogroups.com, "Manuel" <verti@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > This is the last one from the prolific Summer.
> > >
> > > http://www.manuelj.com/Astronomy/Galaxy/M33-The-Triangulum-Galaxy
> > >
> > > Hope you like it,
> > > Manuel.
> > >
> >
> >
>


#9783 From: "Dave" <dmcdona@...>
Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 9:18 pm
Subject: Re: My opinion and mine...
davidjmcdonald
Send Email Send Email
 

As a user of FLI products, I wouldn’t think twice where to spend my hard-earned euro (and by God, they’re hard to come-by right now) on my next imaging-system products.

 

The products work (when they didn’t, FLI fixed them for me quickly and with no fuss), technical support is simply excellent and this particular board is a refreshing change from other boards.  Not that those other boards are bad; just that this is one is blessed with no-nonsense criticism (I’ve always found it constructive), a lack of gratuitous back-slapping and a very healthy dose of referenced technical information. Plus, FLI do not moderate it which allows for full and frank exchanges of view.

 

On the one occasion where I delved deeper than normal and asked advice about scientifically characterising my CCD, the support was, well, just superb.  For those that offered their advice (and even crunched numbers for me) – not one red cent changed hands.  I don’t know what Richard’s hourly rate it but thanks be to God he didn’t charge me (or Tim either).

 

I can understand that the conversations that go on here might not be to everyone’s taste, but it’s a free world – switch off if it doesn’t suit you.  And that isn’t meant in a “if you don’t like it, get lost” kind of way.

 

If you want your ego massaged or if you like gushing and cooing over “pretty pictures” (and having your own equally gushed and cooed over), this is not the place for you.  If you want to seriously improve your techniques, *really* know your equipment inside out and push the envelope, stick around.  This is a board where you can actually learn something you didn’t even know you didn’t know.  And that, at a guess, 90% + of astro imagers equally do not know they don’t know…

 

As a pursuer of science imaging (with the odd “pretty picture” to keep me sane), this board suits me right down to the ground.  I find that the tone and topics are very agreeable to me. Your mileage may vary.

 

I forget the exact quote - “ Opinions are like ???, everyone has one” – but I have a vague memory that it is probably very apt in the current context.  And that goes for my own opinion above of course J

 

Dave

 

Re: gushing, cooing and ego massaging – I don’t mean them in a derogatory sense – I just simply know that some people really like that – including astro friends of mine. I’ve been known to do it too.  But I’m a little more reserved now.  This board must’ve really rubbed off on me.

 

 

 

 

From: FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Tim Khan
Sent: 09 November 2011 14:33
To: FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [FLI_Imaging_Systems]

 




I will say: Sometimes things can fall thru the cracks , however,  I never had but exemplary service from FLI:

 

2006/7 I purchased a PL16803, First had a Kodak sensor issue with the cover slip, too many dust donuts due to the some coatings process or bubbles in the cover (not a FLI problem), and the camera cooled so good that I had a dew problem on the exterior chamber window!

    FLI installed a Dew heather, and replaced the sensor at no expense.

 

Still had a problem on very humid nights (imaging either 6ft from the Atlantic or deep in the everglades), after several hours of use dew would form in the early morning hours.

    Again FLI added a second heater, and I believe they added the anti RBI LEDs and I paid only for shipping.

 

ML8300 had the CCD window issue.

    FLI changed out at no expense, I only paid for shipping. 

 

Upgraded from a PL16803 to a ML16803, yes an upgrade because, over a 3 year period FLI makes continual improvements of the circuit design, my current ML16803 has lower noise than the first generation PL16803. Furthermore, it almost cools as good as the PL (within 5C).

 

Forgot to mention I was able to order a customized ML8300, having the same back-focus as my ML16803 and 4 readout modes.

 

Recently, I plugged the wrong wall transformer into the my CFW and blew the board, FLI repaired it a reasonable cost.

 

FLI does listen to real valid suggestions from their users, Richard has provided his technical knowledge which paved the way to providing Anti-RBI hardware and software. Also, Jim has implemented some tweaks and binning on the Anti-RBI MaximDL plugin as per my suggestions.

 

 

 

 

From: Southern Stars Observatories <jcpelle@...>
To: FLI_Imaging_Systems@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, November 8, 2011 8:25 PM
Subject: RE: [FLI_Imaging_Systems] Re: My opinion and mine...

 

> The uncensored and non-moderated policy on this ....

Jim, this is absolutely false and I may prove it.

It is forbidden to tell the truth about difficulties encountered with your products
and your totally deficient support.

You delivered to us a PL9000, at full price, that was barely in alpha test mode, we
had failures after failures, and your only proposal was that we spend at least 2000
USD for a camera a few weeks old. You refused our proposal that was at a very
minimal cost for you as well as for us. And years after it is not yet fixed.

You have time to moderate the list, but not to answer about what you did with the
money (thousands of USD) we sent several years ago for a filter wheel and a set of
Astrodon filters never received.

There is no way to believe what you tell. 48 hours after we had *privately* reported
ice crystals on our CCD (on a some 100 days camera) you wrote on the FLI list "FLI
cameras never leak"! What a lie!

The only allowed critics on your list are these made by your sponsored hit man
against all your competitors and some providers he had issues for reasons not even
related to technical issues, but personal issues. You may not, in good faith ignore
that.

But there is worse, you let (and certainly encourage) him to made claims you
perfectly know are false, just because they serve your interests.

I had only false promises after false promises from FLI.

> Their groups are locked down tighter than bank vault.

Absolutely false, it is just brainwashing, but you are an expert in that matter.
There is not a week without, on some of these groups, people reporting issues,
And not only they may be freely discussed, but they are solved on the contrary of
what I see with FLI, where the one complaining is immediately told to contact
off-list and moderated.

> FLI delivers the best products and world class service. They are not without
> flaws or deficiencies, but they are the best.

The best..., it is just commercial claims, you have yet to prove it to me and not by
an additional cost of more than 2000 USD.

> This group has some vocal members.

Why the plural? There is only your sponsored guy.

> These same people, more often than not, provide valuable technical
> knowledge to the group.

Add 'biased' please.

> Squelching speech is not me.

I am waiting to see that mail on your list

> Jim Moronski
> FLI Yahoo! Groups Moderator
****************

That is the best one! The group is not moderated, but there is a moderator!

One more lie from you, Jim, sorry.

If you want an extended list of your lies and these of Greg, ask me, just allow me
to use your mails.

Now I will appreciate if I may use my PL9000. All the issues you may not ignore
Where well inside the warranty period (a few months), and you were told in time.

I want these issues fixed, if you are not courageous enough to publish that mail, it
doesn't matters.

And BTW, point me to only one message to the list in which what I wrote was not the
truth.
You moderate me just because I was telling the truth about the failures of your
products and services.

It is a surprising implementation of free speech.

Jean-Claude PELLE
Southern Stars Observatories.

 





Messages 9754 - 9783 of 12275   Oldest  |  < Older  |  Newer >  |  Newest
Add to My Yahoo!      XML What's This?

Copyright 2010 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy - Terms of Service - Guidelines NEW - Help