IOTD Alternative idea for AB

IOTD is a cool thing, we all know that. But the reality is that the vast majority of us will never have images seriously considered as IOTD for one reason or another. So I was thinking about this and would like to propose that there be a couple of extra “medals” that could be awarded independent of the automatic ones based on number of likes (which favors those who have the most followers). Perhaps something like:

1. Great Image Artistically
2. Great Image Technique
3. Deserves To Be Appreciated

I'm not sure if I understand you correctly.

The selection of images initially has nothing to do with the likes received.
Conversely, it is of course the case that selected images receive a lot of attention and therefore usually also receive a lot of likes.

The criteria you mentioned will of course also be used by the reviewers for the selection as TopPic/IOTD.
Of course, not every image that deserves it can be elected as IOTD. (There is only one per day.)
But in my opinion the worthy pictures have a good chance of being selected as TopPic.
Since many people are involved in selecting the images, different perspectives come into play.
In my opinion, the process for selecting the images is democratic, well thought out and mature.

Look here:
https://welcome.astrobin.com/iotd

I was thinking of the (now obsolete?) flags indicating “rising” and such for statuses. I assumed those were based on likes as they usually have lots of likes and the criteria seemed vague. In any case, it does seem difficult to surface good images unless you spend a lot of time trying to lure people to follow you or you follow. 

I posted before I saw that there were a number of similar topics. I see that this can be a sensitive subject now. I was hoping that there could be something to recognize an image independently of IOTD.

Thankfully I do this for my own amusement although it would be nice if an image of mine was recognized in some way. I’ll just go back to minding my own business. I just won’t submit to IOTD now as it seems I’ll have very little chance for that or even a badge indicating it’s a good pic. Maybe all mine are terrible? Whatever, I do this for fun.

Francesco Meschia:
I would encourage you to submit your pictures in any case!!! There's no cost or penalty in doing that, whatever the outcome. Your pictures are quite good, in my opinion, and if you don't submit them you'll never know if they meet the taste and approval of submitters, reviewers, judges.

I think, meeting the taste of others is not the aim of the game. You have to find your own stile, instead of imitating other’s stile only to get a fancy badges. In the end there are only three individuals who have to like the image: me, myself and I. 🤪

@TurtleCat I would agree with the last couple of posts here. 1st you have a very nice profile with very nice pictures that I’d submit for IOTD.

And especially what @Ruediger said about you being the only person in the end that needs to be happy with the image you produce. 

I’ve had several images that I thought was good enough to at least get a bronze arrow and never got one, and other images that I didn’t think were good enough at all and got something. Again regardless of what you get with an image you have to be happy with it.

Dale

The top pick and promotion from submitters is something I haven’t fully understood. But since no one has done that to any of my images I guess they are below average or just don’t get enough views from anyone. As I said earlier, I do this for my own amusement. My suggestion wasn’t purely about my own work but others where I see some great images that have like 5 views. I thought having some mechanism where good images could be tagged differently than what is being done today would be helpful. I see that I am mistaken. We can let this thread die now.

Unless you explicitly submit your image to the IOTD queue (which, you said in a previous post, you don’t do), they will not be part of the process and so it’s guaranteed that they won’t be seen by any submitter and won’t therefore receive any badge.
Views are a different metric. It correlates with how many people follow you, which correlates loosely to how much you engage with the overall community (how many people you follow, how many comments you leave, etc.).

Hello everyone, 

I have been a member for a couple of years now and while I have been an amateur telescope maker and visual guy my entire time in the hobby, close to 50 years now, astrophotography has always  been a dream. 5 years ago I started my journey into AP. I love the precision that AP requires. To reach that level of precision (focus, guiding, processing …) takes time, commitment, lots of frustration, and failure to gain the experience to be successful.  I am impressed with the software, equipment and seamless integration that todays modern astro equipment enjoys. This is a big reason that the hobby is, what I think, is in its Golden Age.

With the development of remote observatories that provide stacked, calibrated images to your in-box for you to process are wonderful. I would entertain using such a service to use a particular piece of equipment I am interested in, or to image something in the southern hemisphere that I can't image from my northern latitude. The data and images that I see posted on AB from these sources (including Hubble and other data) are fantastic and should be admired and awarded. The images that fall into this category should be excluded from the current pool of images to be considered for awards in the current model. They should have a separate category. They can have all of the underlying protocols that are in place currently. However, I think these images should be in a category of Image Processing or RIP (Remote Image Processing).  I am not talking about the person that rents a pier or has a remote observatory with their own equipment. I think an image that is judged should reflect all aspects required to produce the image. This includes image acquisition, image processing and ownership not just image processing. Maybe this view is dated and a sign I am getting old and should be more tolerant of change. However, I believe when you purchase a dataset for an image, it crosses the threshold between amateur and professional. In a magazine, the person that clicked the shutter on the camera gets the credit. Not the person that runs the digital darkroom. A small but significant difference.

Much more than my 2 cents worth on this subject. 

CS Tim

P.S.
After I posted this I thought who would read this and possibly how someone on both sides of this topic would receive my view. With that said, what would the outcomes be? I think that the owners/users of these Remote Observatories that sell time on their equipment would welcome this change. It would promote these facilities and provide a direct conduit to their users to display the achievements of using such data. I am sure this also would have increase revenue to AB which would allow AB to grow.  I have always wanted to be judged by my piers and this would enhance the data these companies provide and a provide a space for users of this data to display what can be achieved by using this data.

Brian Boyle:
It is clear the focus is on technical excellence over creativity. Myself, I might prefer greater emphasis on creativity and originality, but that really isn't the vibe of this site. Still, I pay my subscription and get a lot of use out of the site under these rules. IOTD gives me a goal to aim for, [even given my woeful conversion form Bronze -> Silver -> Gold] means that I am unlikely ever to achieve it.

I don't want to put words in your mouth, but I hate the idea of a false dichotomy between technical and creative qualities in an image. It does not have to be one or the other. There are plenty of very creative yet very well processed images out there.

Tim Ray:
Maybe this view is dated and a sign I am getting old and should be more tolerant of change

None of this is new and such ideas have been proposed in the past, you can take a look at other threads. I don't think there is any  interest in changing the IOTD criteria as the IOTD manifesto makes clear. Given that, the approach I take is the following: if there is an image that makes TP, TPN, or IOTD that I think I could reasonably take under my conditions using my equipment - well, I'll generally like or comment on it and will follow the imager so I can learn. If an IOTD, TP, TPN etc., falls outside this criteria, I generally pay no  attention to it. There is probably enough of a diversity of images making these picks that you can choose to pay attention to the subset of images that you care to take, whether it is remote imaging, backyard imaging, or simply data processing.

Brian Boyle:
It is clear the focus is on technical excellence over creativity. Myself, I might prefer greater emphasis on creativity and originality, but that really isn't the vibe of this site. Still, I pay my subscription and get a lot of use out of the site under these rules. IOTD gives me a goal to aim for, [even given my woeful conversion form Bronze -> Silver -> Gold] means that I am unlikely ever to achieve it.

I don't want to put words in your mouth, but I hate the idea of a false dichotomy between technical and creative qualities in an image. It does not have to be one or the other. There are plenty of very creative yet very well processed images out there.

Hi  @SemiPro  I was referring the AB manifesto below - with particularly reference to the last six words.   That's not to say that creative and technically excellent images don't exist. I don't think, and it certainly wasn't my intention to give that impression.  Rather that, in AB's own words, technical excellence is the focus,  

 The “AstroBin Image of the Day and Top Picks”, hereby abbreviated as IOTD/TP, is a long-running system to promote beautiful, interesting, peculiar, or otherwise amazing astrophotographs[b],[/b] with a focus on technical excellence.