Suspicious quantities of likes on some user’s images - Forums

Dark Matters Astrophotography · Jul 27, 2025, 04:14 PM
My point was that it is entirely clear from my view that Ani used our data to produce the result. He’s even furthered that in the description of the image.

I agree that it's clearly mentioned, but if the image appears in search results for people who want to see images acquired with equipment that the user owns, then the classification is misrepresented.

Dark Matters Astrophotography · Jul 27, 2025, 04:14 PM
If image classification is the crux of the issue entirely then maybe just use Remote Observatory and have a checkbox instead for purchased/downloaded? Then there’s not two different trees of taxonomy required to express that?

That's not needed, because the distinction is already made in the form:

📷 Screenshot 2025-07-27 at 19.17.25.jpg

Arun H:
Dark Matters Astrophotography:
Whether someone picks Amateur Facility or Remote Observatory -- to me, is just pedantic and is nothing more than picking nits for the sake of being thorny. It is clear to me and others that the data was obtained from Dark Matters Astrophotography. At the end of the day, that is what you are advocating for and I agree with that bit.

I've more than made my point. At the end of the day, I believe that there is value in accurate characterization of effort. I'm not going to beat this dead horse any more. Sal is ultimately the owner of this site, and he runs this community. If he does not see the value in this, that is the end of it. It may be clear to you, but it certainly wasn't clear to me, and it will not be clear to several others.

I am glad you feel you have made it, although there was a lot you ignored that I was adding to the discussion. But, to each his own.

This sounds more like the existing process for classifying data is confusing or could use some changes to make it easier for people to classify data in a consistent manner that eliminates ambiguity. I am all for clarity.

What I still do not get is the general idea put forth that purchased data is bad or "cheating". I made a very clear point that there is a wide variance in the end results using the same master data that leads me to believe that the true end goal of crafting a high quality image is still in the hands of the experienced, no matter how the acquisition occurred (within reason of course). This was a point you ignored entirely. I am not sure if you missed it, or preferred not to engage with it, as it did not fit the narrative you have been on about.

Either way, you are welcome to peruse the results on our page and I think you will see this difference quite easily if you were to do so.

Salvatore Iovene:
{"type":"doc","content":[{"type":"blockquote","content":[{"type":"paragraph","content":[{"type":"text","marks":[{"type":"link","attrs":{"href":"/u/darkmattersastro","target":"_blank","rel":null,"class":"forum-quote-author"}}],"text":"Dark Matters Astrophotography"},{"type":"text","text":" · "},{"type":"text","marks":[{"type":"link","attrs":{"href":"/forum/topic/184144?page=2#post-200893","target":"_blank","rel":null,"class":"forum-quote-timestamp"}}],"text":"Jul 27, 2025, 04:14 PM"}]},{"type":"paragraph","content":[{"type":"text","text":"My point was that it is entirely clear from my view that Ani used our data to produce the result. He’s even furthered that in the description of the image."}]}]},{"type":"paragraph","content":[{"type":"text","text":"I agree that it's clearly mentioned, but if the image appears in search results for people who want to see images acquired with equipment that the user owns, then the classification is misrepresented."}]},{"type":"blockquote","content":[{"type":"paragraph","content":[{"type":"text","marks":[{"type":"link","attrs":{"href":"/u/darkmattersastro","target":"_blank","rel":null,"class":"forum-quote-author"}}],"text":"Dark Matters Astrophotography"},{"type":"text","text":" · "},{"type":"text","marks":[{"type":"link","attrs":{"href":"/forum/topic/184144?page=2#post-200893","target":"_blank","rel":null,"class":"forum-quote-timestamp"}}],"text":"Jul 27, 2025, 04:14 PM"}]},{"type":"paragraph","content":[{"type":"text","text":"If image classification is the crux of the issue entirely then maybe just use Remote Observatory and have a checkbox instead for purchased/downloaded? Then there’s not two different trees of taxonomy required to express that?"}]}]},{"type":"paragraph","content":[{"type":"text","text":"That's not needed, because the distinction is already made in the form:"}]},{"type":"paragraph","content":[{"type":"text","marks":[{"type":"bold"}],"text":"📷 Screenshot 2025-07-27 at 19.17.25.jpg"},{"type":"image","attrs":{"src":"https://cdn.astrobin.com/ckeditor-files/4/2025/7bc18b1c-4928-4f87-8cb7-0c462cfac403.jpg","alt":"Screenshot 2025-07-27 at 19.17.25.jpg","title":"Screenshot 2025-07-27 at 19.17.25.jpg"}}]}]}

So is it users blatantly categorizing images wrong (less likely) or is the existing solution complex in manners in which it does not need to be (more likely)? That was what I was expressing.

Dark Matters Astrophotography · Jul 27, 2025, 04:26 PM
So is it users blatantly categorizing images wrong (less likely) or is the existing solution complex in manners in which it does not need to be (more likely)? That was what I was expressing.

No, it's surely the form that needs to be clearer. Ain't nobody going to read the sub-text. I'll see what I can do!

Salvatore Iovene:
{"type":"doc","content":[{"type":"blockquote","content":[{"type":"paragraph","content":[{"type":"text","marks":[{"type":"link","attrs":{"href":"/u/darkmattersastro","target":"_blank","rel":null,"class":"forum-quote-author"}}],"text":"Dark Matters Astrophotography"},{"type":"text","text":" · "},{"type":"text","marks":[{"type":"link","attrs":{"href":"/forum/topic/184144?page=3#post-200897","target":"_blank","rel":null,"class":"forum-quote-timestamp"}}],"text":"Jul 27, 2025, 04:26 PM"}]},{"type":"paragraph","content":[{"type":"text","text":"So is it users blatantly categorizing images wrong (less likely) or is the existing solution complex in manners in which it does not need to be (more likely)? That was what I was expressing."}]}]},{"type":"paragraph","content":[{"type":"text","text":"No, it's surely the form that needs to be clearer. Ain't nobody going to read the sub-text. I'll see what I can do!"}]}]}

Awesome!

Scott Stirling:
Hi, this may be just a complaint you can file under jealousy or paranoia. But I do feel that users Alpha Zang and Weitang Liang (collaborators working on the same images) have somehow figured out how to game astrobin’s algorithms. I see incredible numbers of likes on their images and a relentless series of images produced from them almost daily. I feel like there’s something amiss about how these two names have been dominating astrobin this year. Many other people post images of the same targets and same quality but somehow these two names will swamp anyone else by somehow always being the most liked by very large margins — like several hundred likes where others have a couple dozen. Seems suspicious to me after using astrobin for years.

I saw one alpha zangs images a few months back, instantly like it and followed him.
He seems to have access to a 1m telescope and creates amazing looking images.

I'm more concerned about the suspiciously low number of likes on my own images ;(

Dark Matters Astrophotography:
What I still do not get is the general idea put forth that purchased data is bad or "cheating". I made a very clear point that there is a wide variance in the end results using the same master data that leads me to believe that the true end goal of crafting a high quality image is still in the hands of the experienced, no matter how the acquisition occurred (within reason of course). This was a point you ignored entirely. I am not sure if you missed it, or preferred not to engage with it, as it did not fit the narrative you have been on about.

Hi Bill, I did not engage with this because I neither claimed it is "bad" nor "cheating". Those are words I didn't use. What would be the point of engaging with you on something I did not claim? You put the word "cheating" in quotes, thereby implying I used that word. Quite obviously, I didn't.

On the contrary, I have been pretty clear that purchased data has its place and benefits. It is simply a different level of effort and engagement than an image that has been both acquired and processed by the imager. As long as the details are made clear in the image, there is no problem. A viewer can decide what value they wish to put on the image. No different than making it clear in authorship of books or in scientific work. Today, there is a level of confusion on the matter, and not even a requirement that the author clearly state the source of the data. That is a problem.

Seems like Sal agrees that things could be made clearer. I have thus accomplished what I wanted to.

Hi All,

I’d like to sincerely thank the friends and community members who stood up for me in this thread — your trust and support mean a lot. 🙏

At the same time, I fully understand why certain doubts have arisen. Perhaps I haven’t done enough to clearly present the background and infrastructure behind my work, which may have led to confusion. That’s on me.

To help clarify things, I will soon publish photos and information about my equipment and observatories, including details on the number of telescopes I operate across different locations. I believe transparency is the foundation for healthy dialogue, and I welcome honest questions.

AstroBin is a community I deeply care about. Over the past few months, I’ve invested a significant amount of time and energy here — not only by sharing my images, but also by building bridges between this platform and the rapidly growing astrophotography community in China. My goal has always been to grow with this community, not ahead of it.

I believe that diversity and mutual understanding are what make AstroBin special. Let’s keep the discussion respectful, constructive, and open — and keep the sky wide for everyone.

— Alpha Zhang

Alpha Zhang:
Hi All,

I’d like to sincerely thank the friends and community members who stood up for me in this thread — your trust and support mean a lot. 🙏

At the same time, I fully understand why certain doubts have arisen. Perhaps I haven’t done enough to clearly present the background and infrastructure behind my work, which may have led to confusion. That’s on me.

To help clarify things, I will soon publish photos and information about my equipment and observatories, including details on the number of telescopes I operate across different locations. I believe transparency is the foundation for healthy dialogue, and I welcome honest questions.

AstroBin is a community I deeply care about. Over the past few months, I’ve invested a significant amount of time and energy here — not only by sharing my images, but also by building bridges between this platform and the rapidly growing astrophotography community in China. My goal has always been to grow with this community, not ahead of it.

I believe that diversity and mutual understanding are what make AstroBin special. Let’s keep the discussion respectful, constructive, and open — and keep the sky wide for everyone.

— Alpha Zhang

Alpha,
Thanks for such a sincere response and I hope that you keep up the good work. You certainly deserve all the positive responses that your images receive and it is a delight to have so many talented and considerate people like you participating on this site. For the most part, the AB community seems very collaborative and supportive and I hope that we can all work together to keep it that way. I look forward to hearing more about your equipment, telescopes, and observatories!

John

I noticed he is from China. Lots of thumbs up on his images. I don't pay too much attention to IOTD and awards etc. However once I read this thread the first thing that came to mind:
Google "china population":
Here is the result
China/Population
1.411 billion (2023)
It took me 5 seconds

I tought this was obvious

Rafael Amarins:
I noticed he is from China. Lots of thumbs up on his images. I don't pay too much attention to IOTD and awards etc. However once I read this thread the first thing that came to mind:
Google "china population":
Here is the result
China/Population
1.411 billion (2023)
It took me 5 seconds

I tought this was obvious

Actually, you can check the likes on any of the images yourself and see that the vast majority of them are from non-Chinese people. This is a profoundly stupid comment that borders on racism.

Well that escalated quickly. Calling others stupid and racist. This is akward but let me elaborate:

What I mean is whenever someone from my comunity/country uploads an image the people who know and follow this person/user will get a notification about the new image. Then they like it. The bigger the community, the more likes it tends to have.
Is is that simple.

Guys, don't fight please. This is not needed. Dan called the comment stupid and racist, not you personally, Rafael. Can you both please drop this tangent?

For what it's worth, AstroBin is growing in China but is not nearly as big as North America and Canada, over there.

hi

I think we can create about 1,000 categories, and I don't know if we'll make everyone happy. We'll see.
But one thing is clear: everyone will create a category, thinking in their subconscious about what they don't like. Think carefully about it.

don't forget to look at the stars

please, Just enjoy the moment

CS
Brian

Alpha Zhang:
Hi All,

I’d like to sincerely thank the friends and community members who stood up for me in this thread — your trust and support mean a lot. 🙏

At the same time, I fully understand why certain doubts have arisen. Perhaps I haven’t done enough to clearly present the background and infrastructure behind my work, which may have led to confusion. That’s on me.

To help clarify things, I will soon publish photos and information about my equipment and observatories, including details on the number of telescopes I operate across different locations. I believe transparency is the foundation for healthy dialogue, and I welcome honest questions.

AstroBin is a community I deeply care about. Over the past few months, I’ve invested a significant amount of time and energy here — not only by sharing my images, but also by building bridges between this platform and the rapidly growing astrophotography community in China. My goal has always been to grow with this community, not ahead of it.

I believe that diversity and mutual understanding are what make AstroBin special. Let’s keep the discussion respectful, constructive, and open — and keep the sky wide for everyone.

— Alpha Zhang

keep going and don't stop

CS
Brian

Brian Diaz:
hi

I think we can create about 1,000 categories, and I don't know if we'll make everyone happy. We'll see.
But one thing is clear: everyone will create a category, thinking in their subconscious about what they don't like. Think carefully about it.

don't forget to look at the stars

please, Just enjoy the moment we have to see the stars and it is not forever

CS
Brian

No, it probably wouldn't make everyone happy.

People would be a lot stronger if they focused on their own best efforts & learning new things & stop worrying about awards, IOTD, who gets the most likes, etc.

Life is short , think carefully about how you want to spend the limited time & energy you have in this world.

This thread/issue is similar to many others. But that doesn't make it any less relevant.

This is a social site, so those with the time & money & equipment & posts will - all other things being equal - end up towards the top of the popular heap.

By my estimation the user in question has posted over 500 hours of imaging data in the past week. Wow. Hats off to him. His images are good/great, and I have thumbed lots of them. Do I wish I had his resources? Not really, I am happy in my own skin. The only person I am competing with is myself.

I cannot believe anyone would manipulate their stats by fake accounts, when it is far easier to manipulate your own AB index by selectively culling your own images. But does anyone really care about the largely-broken AB index anyway? IOTDs are another thing, but while I would honored to receive one, it is not what makes me do this hobby.

For me, Astrobin remains a place to be inspired by the wonderful images posted. My faith in AB would only ever be shaken if some of those images were shown to be "generated" by means other than our selfless labour under dark skies with occasionally temperamental gear.

Until then, I shall sit back and enjoy the fruits of my friends' labours.

CS Brian

Brian Diaz:
everyone will create a category, thinking in their subconscious about what they don't like. Think carefully about it.

don't forget to look at the stars

please, Just enjoy the moment we have to see the stars and it is not forever

Hi Brian -

Nobody is asking for a category. The only thing that's been asked is that people accurately and transparently record how the image was acquired (themselves, remote observatory they own, remote observatory someone else operates, etc.) This is just a basic expectation of proper documentation. Is this really too much to ask? Astrobin seeks to be a system that stores these efforts, a system of record. There exist means to record how images are acquired TODAY. So nothing new is being asked for. Is it really OK for this to be a complete free for all?

I think most of us enjoy the stars. I personally enjoy setting up my scope and being under the stars a lot more than processing the results, which I consider to be a chore. But I think it is possible to enjoy the stars and also ask for improvements in the community we all participate in.

Arun H:
Nobody is asking for a category. The only thing that's been asked is that people accurately and transparently record how the image was acquired (themselves, remote observatory they own, remote observatory someone else operates, etc.) This is just a basic expectation of proper documentation. Is this really too much to ask? Astrobin seeks to be a system that stores these efforts, a system of record. There exist means to record how images are acquired TODAY. So nothing new is being asked for. Is it really OK for this to be a complete free for all?

I think most of us enjoy the stars. I personally enjoy setting up my scope and being under the stars a lot more than processing the results, which I consider to be a chore. But I think it is possible to enjoy the stars and also ask for improvements in the community we all participate in.

I understand, but the thing is, I can't find a reason for all this situation and more.
Because the right questions haven't been asked.

What is the reason for a hobby ?
Why do we decide to have a hobby?
What do we look for in a hobby?

And honestly, every time these discussions come up, it doesn't answer any of the questions.

Brian Diaz:
I understand, but the thing is, I can't find a reason for all this situation and more.
Because the right questions haven't been asked.

What is the reason for a hobby ?
Why do we decide to have a hobby?
What do we look for in a hobby?

And honestly, every time these discussions come up, it doesn't answer any of the questions.

In my opinion, those are questions for a different thread.

Frankly, the answers will be unique to each individual. Some people like the acquisition process, others the processing, yet others the social interaction, and others still, the sense of accomplishment from getting an award. Any and all of those are valid reasons. It is also perfectly valid to only acquire, or only process, or both, or some other collaboration.

But, when I look at an image with someone's name on it, I like to understand what role the imager has played, how and where the image was acquired, so I may determine for myself if there is something that I personally can learn from it given my level of commitment and my constraints. It really is as basic as that.

Salvatore Iovene:
Dark Matters Astrophotography · Jul 27, 2025, 04:26 PM

So is it users blatantly categorizing images wrong (less likely) or is the existing solution complex in manners in which it does not need to be (more likely)? That was what I was expressing.

No, it's surely the form that needs to be clearer. Ain't nobody going to read the sub-text. I'll see what I can do!

I accidentally ran into this thread, and noticed my name being mentioned a few times!

Honestly, I didn’t even know there were more than 3 options to select the source of the image! I was just used to clicking “Remote Observatory” since that is what I use for the majority of my images which are acquired through my remote systems, and thought that was the closest of the three.

The dropdown does give you more appropriate options, now that I see so per @Arun H’s screenshot in his thread above. Suffice it to say my intention wasn’t to mislead anyone, otherwise I wouldn’t have flagged that the data source came from @Dark Matters Astrophotography as I mention in the description for images acquired through their wonderful service.

I will select the right option going forward, but @Salvatore Iovene, whatever you can do to simplify that list would benefit the community.

And, like other’s have called out, @Alpha Zhang’s images are frickin awesome! I am not surprised at all that he gets the number of likes he does! Keep up the good work Alpha and ignore the noise.

Ani

Ani Shastry:
Suffice it to say my intention wasn’t to mislead anyone, otherwise I wouldn’t have flagged that the data source came from @Dark Matters Astrophotography as I mention in the description for images acquired through their wonderful service.

Hi Ani - I fully realize that it was never your intention to mislead, there is no reason you would have to do this. Bill made mention of your image and I suggested how the existing menus could be used to better characterize the image. For what it is worth, I have referenced some of your other images as excellent examples of processing and acquisition done well.

Alpha Zhang:
Hi All,

I’d like to sincerely thank the friends and community members who stood up for me in this thread — your trust and support mean a lot. 🙏

At the same time, I fully understand why certain doubts have arisen. Perhaps I haven’t done enough to clearly present the background and infrastructure behind my work, which may have led to confusion. That’s on me.

To help clarify things, I will soon publish photos and information about my equipment and observatories, including details on the number of telescopes I operate across different locations. I believe transparency is the foundation for healthy dialogue, and I welcome honest questions.

AstroBin is a community I deeply care about. Over the past few months, I’ve invested a significant amount of time and energy here — not only by sharing my images, but also by building bridges between this platform and the rapidly growing astrophotography community in China. My goal has always been to grow with this community, not ahead of it.

I believe that diversity and mutual understanding are what make AstroBin special. Let’s keep the discussion respectful, constructive, and open — and keep the sky wide for everyone.

— Alpha Zhang
Don't give up. Those of us who follow your work know full well where it comes from. Hard work pays off. Don't give up, keep going.

CS
Astrojuanan

Ani Shastry:
And, like other’s have called out, @Alpha Zhang’s images are frickin awesome! I am not surprised at all that he gets the number of likes he does! Keep up the good work Alpha and ignore the noise.

Now having said that, the majority of the global feed (at least 3 pages long) seemed to be dominated by Alpha's images this evening!

As much as I am a fan of his work, this seems like a broken algorithm somewhere, @Salvatore Iovene?

Aaron Lisco:
Should there be a separate category for Remote imaging since YOU do not do ANY Setup you just BUY high quality DATA and process it.

Remote imaging most certainly is not the same as BUYING data!

1) Almost all actually bought data is from remote setups (since who would sell data from anything but a dark site?).

2) BUT...... most remote data is not bought data! It is simply equipment owned and operated and often set up by the equipment's owner and where the acquired data is downloaded and processed by that same person. The only thing bought (actually rented) is observatory space! That is BY FAR the most common type of remote operation and is done for one and only one reason..... To get your system in a place that is dark and has decent seeing.

Penalizing remote setups would be penalizing the most enthusiastic members of the community so would not seem to be a good idea.

Yes, the current system does make it tough for city-based backyard imagers. Unfortunately, that it is built into the nature of astronomical imaging since a dark site image is always going to be better than a light polluted image. It is also true (and for similar reasons) that a small and dim object is also at a disadvantage because they are less spectacular even when done with equal or superior skill. Also true is that the lone imager is at a disadvantage compared to a team. Not great, but if you make a separate award for every possible situation, you dilute the awards to the vanishing point and overload the judges in the process.

On the subject of one entity getting a disproportionately large number of IOTD, perhaps an annual limit on the number of those for one person or group would be in order? Clearly not for TP or TP nominations, but it might be appropriate for IOTD since, unlike TP, there can only be 365 (or 366) per year..