Re: Admin: policy for reporting high resolution ground-based imageryof Earth satellites

From: Fred Valcho (
Date: Mon Aug 16 2010 - 04:51:36 UTC

  • Next message: Fred Valcho: "Re: Admin: policy for reporting high resolution ground-based imageryof Earth satellites"

    Mostly to George and and in support of Ralf, .02
    I've been a subscriber to this list for about 2 years or so. I have never posted 
    my sightings, but I eagerly await new pics and posting and try to view every 
    single one, and I further try to take the raw data and use one of the software 
    apps or web sights to look at the Sat data, etc, because I am a hungry starving 
    freak trying to eat as much as possible. I'll be the first to admit a lot of the 
    data made no sense to me at in the beginning. I'll confess to ignorance on all 
    counts. But I keep reading.
    My professional life is filled to the brim with raw network data, protocols, 
    specifications, presentations, etc, etc, etc. I eat the stuff 24x7. And I love 
    it. I wanted to be a chef, but Vietnam changed that. Now, its electrons flowing 
    in a net, algorithms people dream up,  and specs I have to proof or simply just 
    accept - they are not always correct!
    With that said, folks postings to this alias is a fresh breeze for me. I am 
    amazed at my own existence in the universe. I have no reason to suspect anything 
    but pure amateur enjoyment from all the postings. Prove a posting as false? Not 
    crossing my mind, even if I had the time, and I did find a suspicious post, I 
    would contact members offline. Just like at any 'job', I follow the rules and 
    stick to the consensus. Science is a tricky business, you can be right for 
    years, then suddenly find out your wrong.
    For as many years as I've been in my line of work (27), I find I am always at 
    the bottom and have to prove myself to the team at nearly every new major 
    undertaking. It is simply human nature. I've learned to turn the grief around 
    that I receive, and turn it to a positive that I can use to show I am capable of 
    more. People will take this as professionalism, and it's goes a long way to get 
    If someone must complain, I sure hope they have the bullets in the gun to back 
    it up! For without proof and substance, they may turn out to just be a 
    'complainer', and no-one on the team would be happy with that. If I don't 
    believe something, I try to put my mind in the other persons shoes, and look at 
    the problem from his view. I aske dfor documentation, then try to duplicate it. 
    Just like in a thesis, I need all the facts. I have feelings and pride, but I 
    don't want these to skew my professionalism. It doesn't get me anywhere, just 
    more frustration and I've had enough of that in my 57 years.
    When I first subscribed, I rooted my self to George as my mentor, because he has 
    done what I would love to have done, studied the sky professionally. George 
    explained why he does what he does. From that I learned why SeeSat-L really 
    exists. Just for fun, and to share.
    Upon Ralf's first posting, I became enthralled at the detail, but knew he had to 
    use ample pics to achieve his resolution detail. I've worked with Photo Shop for 
    years in lunar photography to enhance my crater details looking for landing 
    sights and left over equipment (this is my main fascination in the sky), and can 
    see similar results in his work. Still, I show his PICs off to folks at work and 
    my wife. I can't get enough of them! So I for one say keep it up, you have a 
    supporter here. and Hey, and I learn tons without having to lift a finger, I 
    love it. If I knew it all, I'd write a book. now back to work.
    From: George <>
    Sent: Sun, August 15, 2010 6:44:52 PM
    Subject: RE: Admin: policy for reporting high resolution ground-based imageryof 
    Earth satellites
    > As long as submitters are willing to document the methods and 
    > data, (he says
    > he is) then I don't see any difference.  Obviously some people 
    > are
    > "suspicious" of the results, so they should take their suspicions 
    > to the
    > submitter, shouldn't they?  They can then attempt to replicate 
    > the results,
    With satellite observations there are common errors even among the 
    most reliable.  Sometimes the time offsets are subtracted instead 
    of added so that the time is off by e.g. 10 seconds or 1 minute.  
    Sometimes someone makes a typo or mentions the wrong object id.
    In these cases the error is usually caught quickly, the original 
    observer goes over his notes again and fixes the mistake. In 
    science it's great if someone can verify your results.
    I really can't tell you if there is a parallel among "high res 
    ground imagery of sats".  Possibly not.
    However I can tell you that image processing techniques have made 
    stunning progress (blind deconvolution for example) and will 
    continue to make further progress.  If someone 20 years from now 
    wants to re-analyze a highly processed image on seesat-l and can't 
    get to the original they are out of luck.  In contrast, if someone 
    wants to use 10 years of ppas data to determine satellite 
    configuration based on flashes and sophisticated software, the 
    data is all available.
    - George Roberts
    Seesat-l mailing list
    -------------- next part --------------
    An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
    Seesat-l mailing list

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Aug 16 2010 - 04:52:46 UTC