UK Imaging vs remote site

[tomato]

After another imaging session clouded out tonight, I was just wondering if any imagers in the UK have ever decided to sell up and invest the money 100% in renting time at a remote site?

I could never do it, I like being 'hands on' with the equipment too much, but there must be people out there who have been sorely tempted.

The reason I ask is that most of the traffic on SGL seems to relate to folks imaging with their own set ups, so I was just curious as to what proportion of Astro imagers don't possess a scope or camera.

[alacant]

Hi. Have you thought about pairing with someone who lives in a more favourable climate and sharing your gear?

[wxsatuser]

The LP and weather here in the UK certainly make it tempting.

Have gone part way towards this by joining Deep Sky West, at least I get regular data to play with.

I do like to be hands on, have bought a CCD to combat the LP with some narrowband but it does'nt
help with the months of clouded out.

[StuartJPP]

I do birding and with only a few exceptions the UK's birds are not as colourful as they are in Trinidad and Tobago...Does that mean I must use remote binoculars?

Each to their own I guess and I accept that if you prefer the processing of the data then it makes sense, or searching for planets or comets for instance.

However it does nothing for me.

[RichLD]

I've been very tempted to join DSW but enjoy the being outdoors at night and tinkering with gear aspects of the hobby as much as the processing. I'll never have the quality of data and therefore the quality of image that remote imaging can provide but I gain a great deal of satisfaction from knowing that the prints on my walls are uniquely mine - they also generally have a story behind the capture...

I do think however that if you can afford to get involved with a remote imaging team such as the ones available at DSW then you'll get more fantastic data than you can shake a stick at and therefore loads of processing practice.

Why not have the best of both worlds if you can? 

[Star101]

I am currently signed up to iTelescope. http://www.itelescope.net/ . I have imaged M45 using their scopes in Spain. Basically, one can select coordinates, else a Messier. Then choose a time of the night, day, etc when to image and the times to image. 1 x 30 seconds upto 100 x 300secs and beyond. They also supply Flats, Bias etc.

Remote imaging a great tool. And when, as we have, been socked in with cloud for nigh on three months then remote imaging relieves some star fever frustrations. 

One also gets chance to use equipment that would be way outside most peoples pocket. A choice of aperture and focal length. Colour or mono and all the choice of Ha, OIII etc in between. 

All while you go about doing your other daily chores and sleeping at decent times too. Wake up to an email pointing you to where you can collect and download your images.

Heaven, if that is your thing

Having said this. I much prefer using my own kit here in the UK weather permiting. I like setting up, adjusting the camera, finding a guide star and everything else one can think of when imaging from the garden. 

Its another string to your bow, so to speak  A tool to use if one is wanting/needing to image a stellar object that cannot be gained easily from your location too. And great if you just want to image without buying such expensive kit. ...... 

I recommend anyone to give it a go. Especially if they don't have a telescope yet.

 

[ronin]

If memory serves me a couple of people did this either 2 or 3 years ago, they just got fed up of the lack of consistant and predictable oppertunities. The additional aspect is that you can obtain images from the other side of the world - iTelescopes was on Stargazing Live someone said. Which means that you have a lot of additional objects to capture that cannot be obtained from the UK.

No information on how the people progressed, Suppose they simply had little to exchange with imagers here on SGL in a way. Or they are here but it is not obvious.

Suspect it makes sense in a way once you are familiar with the processing of images, I suppose RGB but then not sure about the darks or the lumence aspects or anything else. Likely a fair option to do as additional to your own imaging, which would also possibly mean you book less time and so not spending out as much or as fast as otherwise.

 

[Petergoodhew]

I've looked at DSW and iTelescope but was put off by the cost. 

I've tried the Bradford Telescope and SLOOH and found the results disappointing and well below the quality that I can achieve here at home. 

So I've teamed up with another guy on here, ampleamp, and we have set up our own gear in Spain.  We control it totally from here over the interweb (powering it up, setting filters, slewing to targets, focus, imaging, shutting it down) - mostly using SGP.  So although I can't touch it without paying it a visit, I feel that it is much more hands-on than using the remote service providers - and I still own the kit.

I have retained my scope and observatory here at home under the permacloud - so if I want to fiddle with something I can still do that.

[swag72]

It's a really tricky one for me ...... sure I am blessed with slightly better skies than the UK folks (I really do mean slightly so far this year) so perhaps I have a different outlook than others - I find the DSW stuff leaves me cold. There's no emotional link to it, you just are in effect buying data..... That's how I feel any way. But I guess it suits many but I just can't get even remotely .... (ha! Did you see what I did there...  ) .....interested in it.

I have the utmost of respect for the guys who slog away with their kit under less than ideal conditions who turn out excellent images - To me that's what it's all about..... OK so my conditions may be more ideal than some, but I have not had an easy night for weeks.... last night the Lakeside went down. I have to go and fix it all myself (with hubbys help of course) not just let someone else do it... that has got to give people a sense of achievement and pride if nothing else  

I'm sure that the remote folks will be along soon and give me a good dressing down

[Petergoodhew]

4 minutes ago, swag72 said:

It's a really tricky one for me ...... sure I am blessed with slightly better skies than the UK folks (I really do mean slightly so far this year) so perhaps I have a different outlook than others - I find the DSW stuff leaves me cold. There's no emotional link to it, you just are in effect buying data..... That's how I feel any way. But I guess it suits many but I just can't get even remotely .... (ha! Did you see what I did there...  ) .....interested in it.

I have the utmost of respect for the guys who slog away with their kit under less than ideal conditions who turn out excellent images - To me that's what it's all about..... OK so my conditions may be more ideal than some, but I have not had an easy night for weeks.... last night the Lakeside went down. I have to go and fix it all myself (with hubbys help of course) not just let someone else do it... that has got to give people a sense of achievement and pride if nothing else  

I'm sure that the remote folks will be along soon and give me a good dressing down

There's an interesting spectrum (no pun intended) of options. From owning and cuddling your own gear, thru the likes of DSW, and finally the option of downloading data from Hubble or the Liverpool Telescope and just processing that.  At this far end of the spectrum all one is doing is processing someone else's data. Some very talented people enjoy doing that (and produce amazing images), but I think for most of us it takes us too far from the core activity of astrophotography (taking images!). I for one have to (a) own the kit, and (b) operate it (albeit remotely) to have any feeling that the end results are mine and mine alone. 

[Alien 13]

I actually enjoy the struggle imaging from near to a city center with fairly basic kit, it does mean some targets are off limits but I get just as much joy in pulling data out of the murk as I would if I had pristine sky's. There is always something you can image regardless of where you are, it is the gradual improvements in technique and tweaks to equipment that make it such a good hobby for me.

Alan

[gnomus]

I think it's great that we have so many options.  And I wouldn't seek to pass judgement on whatever folks choose to do.  

I am not entirely sure when 'hands on' begins and ends.  Not that long ago, you had to guide manually!  Is auto-guiding using PHD hands-on?  What about plate solving, or autofocus?  Many folks set up their sequences and tootle off to bed relying on one or other type of weather device to tell them if they need to get up and close down.  Yet others have their observatories shut down automatically if the weather becomes non-conducive (and then re-open if things improve).  By the time you get to this stage, it seems to me that the physical location of the gear (be that a shed at the bottom of the garden, the Haut-Alpes, Spain, New Mexico ........) is starting to become irrelevant.  

 

 

[swag72]

 

I'm certainly not passing judgement Steve @gnomus- Just saying how some areas of imaging make me feel. Sure I set mine running and go to bed - But when it goes wrong as is often the way at the moment I have to get it running myself..... To me that's more hands on than a 'whatapp' at 22:00 saying that something has gone wrong and 'can you look at it'. 

Also with your own kit you get to pick everything, from individual exposure time to numbers to filters etc...... It strikes me that some forms of group remote can be rather clinical and you get what you get....Here's a question for you.... say for example from your data at DSW you decided that you'd like some more luminance for examaple...... could you get that? 

 

[ollypenrice]

An interesting discussion. I'm in an unusual position because I host five remote setups. If blood, sweat and tears come into it I can promise you that my robotic team have paid their dues! (I don't have any input other than as someone who rents out the concrete and unplugs/replugs USB leads on demand, shovels the odd bit of snow, etc. Well, OK, I sometimes rush out with a straightjacket and talk them into putting down their sledge hammers... ) So these folks have built their system themselves, they run it themselves and I help out. There is no doubt whatever that what they do, running their scopes remotely, is far harder than what I do, which is sit next to our scopes and persuade them to behave in real time.

I receive a very large number of requests from people wishing to join in with our robotic hosting but I am simply out of space, so I hope the mods won't mind me saying this. I have nothing to sell, quite literally. What this shows, though, is that the demand is out there. Buying into a well organized package like DSW is not the only option. You could seek out a host offering what I can no longer offer.

Yet another option: six years ago Yves asked me if I'd consider building an observatory to house a big setup and running it for both of us. He would fund the entire imaging rig and I'd provide the observatory and deal with the work at night. We went ahead on this basis and it worked happily. It only ended when he moved into our new robotic project. So maybe people with the funds but not the skies could talk to imagers with the skies but not the funds... That strikes me as making good sense.

Olly

 

[gnomus]

26 minutes ago, swag72 said:

 

I'm certainly not passing judgement Steve @gnomus- Just saying how some areas of imaging make me feel. Sure I set mine running and go to bed - But when it goes wrong as is often the way at the moment I have to get it running myself..... To me that's more hands on than a 'whatapp' at 22:00 saying that something has gone wrong and 'can you look at it'. 

Also with your own kit you get to pick everything, from individual exposure time to numbers to filters etc...... It strikes me that some forms of group remote can be rather clinical and you get what you get....Here's a question for you.... say for example from your data at DSW you decided that you'd like some more luminance for examaple...... could you get that? 

 

Apologies if you thought I was accusing you of being judgemental, Sara.  That was not what I intended to convey.  Rather, I was saying that I would not criticise anyone from choosing whatever route suits them best (short of theft, that is ).  Of course, being part of a group involves some compromises, but then that is the way of things (I don't get to choose what I watch on the TV every night either).  My main point is that it is tremendous that we have these options available to us, don't you think.  I wouldn't want to persuade anyone that one way is 'better' than the other.  I get the total control and responsibility point of view.  And the lack of 'exclusivity' may bother some - it does me a bit.

I've not been part of DSW all that long, so cannot answer your questions with any real authority.   You can choose the framing (including rotation angle) of your targets, if you wish, and you also choose the 'recipe'.  The chap who runs it has been very reasonable and helpful with me so far, so I guess there wouldn't be a problem getting a bit more of somethng if necesary (but I haven't put this to the test, so might be proved wrong).  Of course, if I were to suggest taking up the telescope to embark on some 400 hour mega mosaic, I suspect that I might not get my way.

I'd like my own remote set up (or a small partnership), but at my stage the DSW thing is working for me.  In the grand scheme of things I thought it was pretty cheap too.    

 

 

 

[StuartJPP]

Automating your own kit is totally different to using someone else's kit. As Sara says, it is up to you to choose your kit, make sure everything works seamlessly, choosing your automation sequence, rain/cloud detection etc. That is where the hands on part comes in to play in my view.

In my case I'd rather process Hubble data and save the money that I'd pay to use these telescopes and put it into a pot. When that pot is full go on holiday to somewhere like La Palma and take some simple imaging kit or even a pair of binoculars or go to Olly's and use his kit 

I do know of someone who is setting up a remote telescope in Spain, but it is all his own kit. If something goes wrong with it there is someone that can be contacted to press the "reset" button. I can live with that as well.

The line between these things does start to blur, but so does anything if you change things incrementally.

But like I said, it is only my opinion, and everyone is free to spend their time and money how they wish.

(I finished typing this message just as Olly's message above was submitted).

 

[swag72]

13 minutes ago, gnomus said:

........My main point is that it is tremendous that we have these options available to us, don't you think.  I wouldn't want to persuade anyone that one way is 'better' than the other. ......

It sure is great to have options and at the end of the day we use what suits us on many levels......  

[gnomus]

Hey this is great.  Much better than the usual 'Which is best: PI or PS?' debate.  

[Davey-T]

I like being outside capturing my own images even if it's a struggle at times.

I must say that my processing skills are inadequate at best so I don't need masses of data that I haven't got time to process.

What I need is a remote person to process my data 

Dave

[RayD]

Back to the OP, I suspect whether you would invest 100% in a remote site largely depends on what you love about astronomy, or in respects to this question, AP specifically.  I personally love looking at and touching the kit.  Measuring, setting up, testing, trying again etc.  I even love the frustration of it not working first time.  For me therefore I personally would never invest 100% in a remote site, but can see the appeal in gathering data from equipment I could only hope of affording, looking at skies which we could only dream of here.

I am in the fortunate position that I am able to image in Spain whenever I want, in a pretty good location, and will next year be embarking on full remote access for my equipment there, but feel that the road to getting there, and the feel of knowing the kit and almost having a connection with it (not just an IP address), makes it more of an extension to my home obsy than a "remote site".

To go 100% remote I suppose you would be more keen on the processing and the final result than the frustrations of getting there, so for me this isn't something I would consider, but I wouldn't be surprised if some do.

[RayD]

1 minute ago, Davey-T said:

What I need is a remote person to process my data 

I'll share the costs with you if you want to split their time 

[Alien 13]

I did start out with a DSLR and wired remote, standing outside and pressing the shutter release every 90 seconds or so and it was strangely satisfying, now my camera is fully controlled over wi fi from my indoor laptop and I almost get the same buzz but not quite.

Alan

[carastro]

I was asked once if I was interested in joining what I think was DSW, but I declined as I felt the same as Sara, that I would be processing data captured by a set up I had nothing to do with.  Also the cost of course.

Despite the poor weather and sky conditions we have to contend with, I feel a sense of satisfaction that it was all done with my own fair hand, even if I could have done with tons more data from a dark location.  

Oh, and very little of my imaging is done remotely, I use a handset, I don't plate solve and I don't autofocus.  I do however sit and watch it all come in remotely once it is all up and running.  

Carole 

[ronin]

One possibly interesting aspect of this is that there are a number of people here on SGL that are trying to get their own set up to do everything from start to finish.

Open the observatory, perform alighment, slew to target, take images and I assume supply the data to them while they are inside - say this as I have just read one and have previously read others.

Other then distance between them and the scope what is the difference?

Is a network cable out of your PC that is using IP over a distance of 25 metersdistance any different to the network cable out of your PC to your router and the internet using IP over say 500 miles?

[swag72]

4 minutes ago, ronin said:

One possibly interesting aspect of this is that there are a number of people here on SGL that are trying to get their own set up to do everything from start to finish.

Open the observatory, perform alighment, slew to target, take images and I assume supply the data to them while they are inside - say this as I have just read one and have previously read others.

Other then distance between them and the scope what is the difference?

Is a network cable out of your PC that is using IP over a distance of 25 metersdistance any different to the network cable out of your PC to your router and the internet using IP over say 500 miles?

For me the difference is that while I do as much as I can from my sofa.... when it all goes wrong (as it is on a regular basis at the moment) I am the one that has to sort it out. If I have some major issues then I can at least say that I sorted it out, not some faceless person 500 miles away for example....... I'm not saying that sorting problems is fun, I hate it ... but at least the problems are all mine  

In this case it is much more than just a cable distance.