limawms
November 23, 2015, 12:21am
22
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 donāt understand the answer. When you say āthis will never happenā concerning a 2nd target, does that mean that the warning will not appear and stop the slew and capture?
Ken
November 23, 2015, 3:04am
23
This is not an āin-sequenceā warning. It only occurs during creation of the sequence, never during its execution.
limawms
November 23, 2015, 4:27am
24
It clear to me now, thanks
Ken
January 11, 2016, 2:04pm
26
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 philosophyā¦ quoting here so I donāy have to type it again:
I have to disagree hereā¦ I think itās because I have a different perspective (maybe not the right oneā¦ just different). I can see the tendency to derive an object driven sequence in your brain. My sequence uses an auto guider, my sequences uses a camera and a CFW, etcā¦
This is not really what SGPro is thoughā¦ SGPro is automation software. It is designed to run a sequence of events. A sequence is comprised of actions, not objects. What does that matter? Well take the auto guider stuff in this thread. The argument has been made that if āthere is no object there should be no actions for that objectā. In reality, I would like the thought process to be āI have defined a series of behaviors and actions for my sequence, now Iām going to specify what object should do those things for meā. This may require a subtle shift in thinking, but I believe, for the purpose SGPro is trying to fulfill, it is the right perspective.
The arguments in this thread prioritize selection of the auto guider as the most import thing about auto guiding. Why? I am not sure. Maybe because itās on the top. Maybe because we are trained to think about the tangible things in life. Maybe itās because we call it āThe Control Panelā and its viewed as an area to control objects and devices. There are a myriad of other reasons (please donāt use this thread to list themā¦ I believe you and itās not really my point).
Soā¦ that said, one could just as easily argue that dithering is the most important thing about guiding, what guider actually fulfills this activity is not too important, just that the sequence dithers. In this line of thinking, the check box to dither could be the most important aspect of guiding and would be responsible for disabling all of the other controls on the tab (including the selection of the guider itself).
I donāt like the idea of a popup asking to clear your actions either. What I do like is that you can just sit down and think through a series of actions youād like performed during the course of your sequence, then you can actually select what will perform them. If you like it, you save it and you are done.
Maybe we should change the name of the equipment profiles (yet another naming convention that facilitates an object driven thought process) to something like activity profiles.
1 Like