Have to agree here, non timeout warning boxes are not a good choice for a semi automated system, worse because it is irrelevant to my setup., So far I always start a sequence manually so can deal with them though wonder what happens if your sequence contains a 2nd F&M target later in the session - if that pops up again could be very problematic - will have to check that.
I’ll add my two cents to this thread. The new dialog is annoying and unneeded. If you think this is necessary, perhaps the warning could be presented when you add a FMW item to a sequence that does not have a rotator defined. That would give the user fair warning without the popup at run time.
I realize you guys are anti-settings whenever possible and I agree for the most part, but this hobby, with so many possible configurations / etc. somewhat mandates everyone is a power user. Power users like settings, though I understand and appreciate the desire to keep it to a minimum.
Overall I think the warning is good, but, perhaps all pop-ups / warnings should have a global auto-dismiss setting. Perhaps a setting of zero would be don’t show it at all (at your own risk). Yes, this requires some more settings, but at least it would apply on a global level and not require settings for each little thing like AF HFR, rotate, and whatever else. (And if someone wants warnings for HFR but not rotation, too bad.)
Also, these warnings could be sent with notifications, right? So if I really care, I could have SGP text me and while I may lose a sub because it continued on, at least I could go in to correct it.
(Just thinking about it, maybe a notifications dockable widget, with color coding, so if I log in a few hours later I can see the activity I missed over that time.)
Unfortunately not. One of the problems this warning is trying to correct is not just that the user did not select auto rotate, but that they don’t have a rotator selected in the first place.
Please see above… this is half the problem.
This doesn’t make sense, you can only be prompted with this if you click Run Sequence. You will never be prompted with this during sequence execution.
There is no other way to start a sequence
This will never happen.
Try to have at least a little tact. You are, after all, talking about my idea (designed to help people). The fact that you say it is unneeded makes me think you didn’t read a single bit of the justification I typed above. That said, I like your idea about a warning when the sequence is created and I’d like some time to consider any possible pitfalls.
SGPro is not designed just for the power user audience. Most of our users are not at this level. It may not seem true, but this is probably because power users tend to be the most vocal. Secondly, options are not free… every one we add, we have to be willing to support.
Also… if anyone is interested, in the total time devoted to thought and complaints around this single warning (designed to save people from capturing hours and hours of worthless data), you could have clicked on it and dismissed it ~3600 times.
Funny post 
Seriously, it’s probably time we all let this go. Ken is saying it’s here to stay.
Sorry @Ken, I did not mean to offend - that is the challenge of written communications. I understand the delicate balance between helpful and annoying warnings. Perhaps an idea for this dialog and other warnings that are non-fatal would be to add a check box to the dialog “Do not show again”. Often when this type of checkbox is present, there is a global feature somewhere that enables all warnings again.
Not necessarily. I would seriously like to consider pushing the warning back to the sequence creation (as @DesertSky suggested). I just need a little bit of time to think about it.
Maybe, but then we just move this argument to the definition of non-fatal. Is it fatal if the sequence runs perfectly, but captures useless data (because you acknowledged this warning 3 months ago with a different sequence, sleep deprived in 20 degree weather)?
@Ken - Certainly a valid consideration. On the other hand you could say, that if the user suppresses the warning, they asked for it. To me, a fatal warning (error?) is one that prevents SGP from logically continuing. There are lots of things I can do as a user such that SGP can’t prevent me from spoiling my images.
This is a self created problem from me, I am basically trying to make the software work differently to how it was designed. I am working on ways to start a sequence based on the output of my AAG and the forecasts that say it will clear at 1 or 2am, easy enough to do with products like AutoIT but the reminder pops cause some aggravation - so auto sequence start is a possibility for me.
Know I could do this with the ACP/Maxim combination but a damn expensive way of doing it and SGP is to my mind virtually perfect and would hate to give it up.
Thanks for the confirm that a 2nd target would not throw up a box.
@Ken, another issue with the current implementation. I got this error with only one target selected which only had flats in it. So the error seems to have been triggered by other targets that where not selected.
This is no longer relevant. The warning has been moved to the sequence
creation part of the MFW.
Ken,
quick question. If I decided not to check the rotator option , is there anyway I can go back and change this setting once the mosaic sequence has been created or should I just start over ?? Thanks.
Dennis
Dennis, you can change it in the target options.
great thanks…I need to read more carefully.
No worries :).
I found this post because of my discovery of the F&M rotator warning that has recently appeared. My question has been asked, but I don’t understand the answer. When you say “this will never happen” concerning a 2nd target, does that mean that the warning will not appear and stop the slew and capture?
This is not an “in-sequence” warning. It only occurs during creation of the sequence, never during its execution.
It clear to me now, thanks
This is a circular argument. If we change it that way, we will get folks that take mosaic images all night at the wrong angle, then complain. Then we will put a warning for that at the front of a front of a sequence and then there will be complaints against that, then this thread will start again. In addition to that, this type of thought is really against out philosophy… quoting here so I don’y have to type it again:
1 Like