Asteroid Zoo Talk

Multiple artifact flag

  • jacob.ervin by jacob.ervin

    Many of the artifacts are present across all frames. Should we be marking each instance of it (every frame?) Or just marking it one time?

    Posted

  • goolic by goolic

    I've marked every frame. I suppose thats useful for automatically finding and dismissing them at a later date.

    Posted

  • wreness by wreness

    I've marked them for every frame, too, since they move so if Whoever is looking at each photo then each photo would have to have its own markings.

    What would be really great is if you could mark all the artifacts in a photo at one time & then hit "done" instead of having to do them one at a time. As it is now you click Artifact - then mark the pic - then click the done button. If a pic has 3 artifacts, that'd be 9 clicks for 3 artifacts. If they're on all 4 photos, you have 36 clicks. I've had photos with 5 artifacts on each (including those little squiggles and dots).

    Or maybe I can just stop being so meticulous. Yeah, that sounds better 😃

    Hi everyone!

    Posted

  • OldKingSol by OldKingSol

    I think it would be a great suggestion to let us press "Done" after clicking ALL artifacts in a frame (or better still if you could just keep adding artifacts on all frames then click "Done" once for all of them, or if it even left you mark artifacts like you do asteroids - one click on each frame per artifact before clicking "Done"). Sometimes there are so many my wrist is actually sore by the time I'm done. :-# #feature_suggestion #feature_requests #carpaltunnel

    Posted

  • Del_Congdon by Del_Congdon

    I agree with OldKingSol that you sometimes have to do a whole lot of clicking to mark up all the artifacts in each image.
    On Planet Four, the marking tools create different markers for blobs, fans, etc, and stay set until the user changes tool - or clicks done for the image.

    Posted

  • AstroTinker by AstroTinker

    Best note I have seen on this problem is to use the 4-frame option, then mark all the obvious artifacts without having to change frames between.

    Posted

  • nicro46 by nicro46

    Why mark ALL artifacts on ALL frames? Each set of images represents an area of sky photographed four times every 10 minutes to every photo. If one or more artifacts affect the filming, and there are still no asteroids, all the images are unnecessary. What then are eliminated and no longer proposed again, is another story ...

    Posted

  • AstroTinker by AstroTinker

    After some online research on Flat Field Defects, what I have seen as the most common multi-frame artifact, it seems the most likely cause is actually incorrect software correction of the images.
    To correct for defects in the ccd and light path a 'flat field image' is shot in one of two ways. The first is against a black screen in front of the scope. The second is to shoot an image in at twilight, as the sky darkens, but before the stars come out. Any stars that are seen are -supposed- to be manually corrected out. The software can then apply a first level correction to new images based on the flat field image, i.e. calibrating out the defects pixel by pixel. The round light and dark spots that 'move' between frames in formation were identified on that site as stars from a twilight flat field correction image which were not adjusted out of that image.
    If we are seeing this many flat field defects (as identified by ALL of our multiple identifications of artifacts), the we are obviously not getting true 'raw images' (which would have NO flat field defects, and which we would not really want anyway), but images processed against a bad flat field image.
    What this means is that IF the true raw images were saved, they could be re-calibrated against a -good- flat field image, and give us properly corrected images to work.
    ... makes me wonder if this was finally identified -BY OUR WORK marking artifacts- and the correction is finally being applied, which could be one 'why' for our current delay...
    ....also, just maybe, the primary algorithm we are checking in parallel against was (or at some point later might be) ALSO getting these crummy images, and the proper correction is being appllied to what that automated system is getting fed. In this case our work identifying problems could be critical to the work of the primary algorithm, and might even result in finding an otherwise hidden impactor... ...just guessing, but as a data analyst I know getting valid feedback data points on a system is VITAL to the correct operation of the system.

    Posted