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

From: Skywise (skywise@skywise711.com)
Date: Thu Aug 12 2010 - 04:38:59 UTC

  • Next message: Brad Young: "BY Classfd Aug 12"

    Although I pretty much only lurk here and don't get to do much
    if any sat observing of my own, I also agree with option 2 in
    addition to David's suggestion.
    
    I would go so far as to say it is a requirement to always provide
    raw frames. That way, others can do their own processing. This
    has multiple benefits.
    
    1> Eliminates any argument of trickery or over-processing.
        This will help establish good rapport amongst contributors.
    2> Allows confirmation of suggested details through a peer-
        review like process (always good science practice).
    3> Permits individuals/groups to share, discuss, and improve
        upon enhancement techniques.
    4> By allowing all parties to use the same source data,
        meaningful comparisons can be made of different processing
        methods.
    5> As processing techniques improve, it will be easier to go
        back to previous raw data for the purpose of re-analysis.
    
    Brian
    -- 
    http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
    Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
    Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
    Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?
    _______________________________________________
    Seesat-l mailing list
    http://mailman.satobs.org/mailman/listinfo/seesat-l
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Aug 12 2010 - 03:41:54 UTC