Slooh.com

[nebularain]

I just stumbled across this.

http://www.slooh.com/

Has anyone here tried this? Is it worth registering for?

Thanks!

[Jigsaw]

Well, for starters, their observatory is located in the Canary Islands, which is going to make using their service quite problematic for folks in radically different time zones.

http://www.slooh.com/faq.html
The time zone shift from the Canary Islands is 5 hours ahead of the East Coast of the United States, and 8 hours ahead of the West Coast, so when the sun sets in the Canary Islands, it is still the afternoon in the United States. Thus, the site will be LIVE for viewing from around 3pm to 1am on the East Coast and 12pm to 10pm on the West Coast.
Then, if I'm understanding this correctly, what you get for your $49 a year fee is as much time as you want looking at whatever the telescope happens to be looking at, but if you want to specify some celestial object that you personally want to look at, you have to pay extra.

Third, you have to be sitting at your computer, and you can only see what fits on the monitor. It seems like that fifty bucks is going towards nothing more than the same end result you'd get from a webcam. With the downside that you'd have to basically make an appointment with yourself to remember to sit down at the computer and stargaze when the Canary Islands "webcam" was online, the way if you want to see "Planet X" in the Ibiza webcam, you have to be there at the right time.

Fourth, you only get to look at one object at a time, per session. I always thought part of the fun of stargazing is being outside and being able to see EVERYTHING. For example, their Sneak Peek (http://www.slooh.com/sneakpeekjs.html) is showing what it will look like. Right at the moment, it's showing the Whirlpool Galaxy. And it's lovely, except that's all there is to look at--the Whirlpool Galaxy. It puts me in mind of APOD, quite frankly. Which is free.

All in all, it sounds like the kind of website that I'd put in my "Amusements" folder and look at from time to time, if it was free, the way it's interesting to drop in at any other webcam. But I wouldn't pay fifty bucks for it.

[slooh]

Slooh's mission is to broaden the public 's interest in astronomy. The location of our equipment in the Canary Islands gives families an introduction to astronomy, without requiring them to stay up into the wee hours of the night. Our goal is to reach out to the 100,000 annual sub ~$300 telescope purchasers with an experience that is cheaper, easier and better. We would hope their experience with SLOOH would stimulate them to become more engaged in all aspects of space exploration, including more support of NASA. (see http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/12/1230_031230_hubbletelescope.html) That said, we think our images and the equipment we let users control will be of interest to serious hobbyists.

Regarding having only one scope view at a time, with your support we will add more and better equipment at high altitude locations all over the world, giving members multiple views, 24 hours a day.

Michael Paolucci
president
SLOOH

[Jigsaw]

Slooh's mission is to broaden the public 's interest in astronomy. The location of our equipment in the Canary Islands gives families an introduction to astronomy, without requiring them to stay up into the wee hours of the night. Our goal is to reach out to the 100,000 annual sub ~$300 telescope purchasers with an experience that is cheaper, easier and better. We would hope their experience with SLOOH would stimulate them to become more engaged in all aspects of space exploration, including more support of NASA. (see http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/12/1230_031230_hubbletelescope.html) That said, we think our images and the equipment we let users control will be of interest to serious hobbyists.

Regarding having only one scope view at a time, with your support we will add more and better equipment at high altitude locations all over the world, giving members multiple views, 24 hours a day.

Michael Paolucci
president
SLOOH
1. If I want to introduce my family to astronomy, I don't need to keep them up until the wee hours--I can take them out in the backyard at nightfall, which is about 5 p.m. here right now, and point. "Orion." "Mars."

2. Even with a sub-$300 telescope, I would have the option, right there in my backyard, of looking at whatever celestial objects I chose to look at. I wouldn't have to wait for the "mission" to change. And multiple objects, too. And all night long, if I wanted to. I wouldn't have to file a request ahead of time to look at *this* and *this* and *this*...

3. That $49 membership fee may be cheaper upfront, but what are you getting for your money? After spending fifty bucks a year for six years on your website, I'd have spent $300, and have nothing to show for it besides X number of hours spent sitting at my computer staring at the monitor and (possibly) some "snapshots" of a limited number of celestial objects. (Which I can get for free from APOD.) And I would have learned nothing beyond possibly some voiceover-narration-provided factoids about astronomy.

Whereas if I spent that same $300 on a telescope, at the end of six years I'd have spent X numbers of hours looking at the actual sky, I'd have seen a virtually unlimited number of the celestial objects that are there to be seen, and I'd have learned some important telescope skills, such as "What is an azimuth?". And I'd be ready to move up to a serious telescope. With maybe a digital camera, even.

4. Kudos to you for thinking you see a market niche, anyway. That's what "capitalism" is all about. :D

[slooh]

I would argue you can't see very much with that sub $300 telescope. It may point at 5000 objects, but you can only see 1--the moon. Most of those telescopes get used once or twice, and then they become sculpture in the corner of the room.

You are obviously an avid astromer, so not sure my arguement applies to you. But there are millions of parents whose children are curious about space, and yet the parent may not know much about it, so they buy a cheap telescope expecting to see the same things Hubble does, and I think they end up greatly disappointed, and turned off to astronomy.

[Archer17]

Welcome to the board slooh. Hope your interest in this site isn't just confined to your "capitalistic" endeavor. If you're interested in anything astronomy-related you'll find many interesting topics here and your input would be quite welcome. However, regarding slooh.com, I have to agree wholeheartedly with what Jigsaw pointed out .. nothing beats the real thing and the fee would deter me from bookmarking your site for casual use. BTW, I disagree with your sub $300 telescope analogy .. even the use of binoculars can be awe-inspiring if you know where to point 'em.

[slooh]

Thanks...nice to learn of this place--why is it called bad astronomy?

[Archer17]

Dr Plait created the Bad Astronomy (http://www.badastronomy.com/) site to address common fallacies and promote further understanding of astronomy. (Check out the main site by clicking on the words 'Bad Astronomy')

[R.A.F.]

...even the use of binoculars can be awe-inspiring if you know where to point 'em.

I love my binoculars!! Wider field of view, and the sight of all those (dimmer than the eye can see) stars are certainly awe-inspiring, no matter what direction you're looking.

[Kaptain K]

I went to the site. I looked at the "sneak peek" (nice image of M 51). I read the "about". I read the "FAQ". Nowhere did I find specifics of the scopes used. Just "catadioptric" and "refractor". And a very vague "44 times more powerful than a typical backyard telescope". :roll:

[slooh]

equipment in use is profiled in the Baltimore Sun article, linked from here....

http://www.slooh.com/press.html

[Kaptain K]

OK, I followed that link. Still no specifics. No diameter, no f/ratio, nothing. Come on. What scopes, what CCD's, etc. How do you define "44 times more powerful than a typical backyard telescope" and what is a typical backyard scope?

[slooh]

ok, here is a little more info., but only because I am a lowly newbie; c-14's; tele vue 85, sbig10's ; f/11 to f/4, depending on use, whether planets or deep space, and whether 1 degree or 5 degree on the wide field

[Kaptain K]

Thank you.

[Jigsaw]

ok, here is a little more info., but only because I am a lowly newbie; c-14's; tele vue 85, sbig10's ; f/11 to f/4, depending on use, whether planets or deep space, and whether 1 degree or 5 degree on the wide field
Um..so, you're saying that you wouldn't have given out that information if you hadn't been a Lowly Newbie and thereby felt somehow obligated? Why not? Is it a secret? All serious observatories are happy--nay, ecstatic--to have people ask them about their telescopes. They'll talk your ear off. And in many cases the information is online, too, you don't have to ask, other than, "Where's the FAQ?"

I'd think that as a businessman you'd be delighted to have us ask questions about your product.

And come to think of it, why aren't the technical specs for your telescope listed on your website somewhere (like, in the FAQ)?

And--no offense--but I have a nasty suspicious mind--You expect us to just give you our credit card number?

https://www.slooh.com/billing.jsp

I mean, all I have to do is put in an e-mail addy, and you expect me to give you my credit card number? No PayPal account, nothing about security? You just want me to give you my credit card number?

[picks self up off the floor in astonishment]

No offense, but I can't help thinking this--are you a scam? People do set up fake websites, you know. Have you got any references? Ever done any other business on the Web?

[slooh]

Gidget,

You must have been treated unfairly in the past, perhaps by a girl as an impressionable youth, to have such a negative outlook. However, it is our goal to satisfy even the most intemperate critics, and as such, I will take your credit card processing suggestions under advisement. The truth is, we have spent most of our limited resource on the core product, not on credit card processing strategies.

[Jigsaw]

Gidget,

You must have been treated unfairly in the past, perhaps by a girl as an impressionable youth, to have such a negative outlook. However, it is our goal to satisfy even the most intemperate critics, and as such, I will take your credit card processing suggestions under advisement. The truth is, we have spent most of our limited resource on the core product, not on credit card processing strategies.
First of all, my name isn't "Gidget", it's "Jigsaw".

Second, a normal businessman would make sure he had his credit card processing strategies in place BEFORE he went into business in the first place. Because otherwise, he can't be sure that people won't be scamming him. And, it's not that big a deal to get Internet credit card processing strategies in place--I know two people who manage their own message boards on which they sell coffee mugs, t-shirts, etc., for which you can pay by credit card, and they managed to set it up without a hassle. It's not rocket science.

Third, you should really spend more time lurking on message boards before you start making judgements about people who are total strangers to you. I'm a 48-year-old married mother of three, FYI. And the only girl who treated me badly as an impressionable youth was the girl who stole a gold chain from me when we were both freshmen in college.

And--I've got 40 years of Alert Consumerism behind me. You're setting off all kinds of alarm bells here, Slooh. Which explains my "negative outlook".

So, now that my Alert Consumer Alarms have been set off, and I am reading your website with a more critical eye, I notice that your web page is phrased so as to make it sound as though you are affiliated with the IAC--but you're not. What it actually says is only that you're set up on Mount Teide, same as them.

http://www.slooh.com/partners.html
Institute of Astrophysics of the Canary Islands

Formed in 1979, the IAC is a consortium of European governments, led by Spain. The IAC oversees world-class astronomical observatories belonging to over 60 academic and government institutions of 19 countries, including one of the largest telescopes in the world: the 10 meter GTC due to start operation in 2004.
SLOOH's observatory on the Canary Island of Tenerife is located at IAC's Mount Teide site, which has clear weather, steady dark skies, and an altitude of 7900 feet. The sun sets five hours earlier at the Canary Islands than it does at the East coast of North America, enabling SLOOH to provide nighttime observations during America's afternoon.

Hyde Memorial Observatory

Based in Lincoln, Nebraska, Hyde Memorial Observatory is the only observatory anywhere that is built, furnished and operated entirely by donations, devoted exclusively to public viewing, completely free of admission charge, staffed only by volunteers.

Also, your page is headed "Partners", but I see nothing about slooh.com being their "partner" on the IAC's website.

http://www.iac.es/gabinete/index1.htm

Nor do I see any mention of slooh.com on the Hyde Observatory's web page, your other "partner".

http://www.hydeobservatory.info/about.html

You don't explain why the Hyde Observatory is your "partner". What's the connection between a very small amateur observatory in Nebraska and a telescope in the Canary Islands?

(And, I might add, the basic information about their telescopes is right there on the page. I didn't even have to ask, "Where's the FAQ?")








So, bottom line is, I have to say, I'm sorry but slooh.com is starting to look like a scam.

I will of course apologize fulsomely if you can come up with some references and prove that you're not. All you have to do is get someone to vouch for you to Phil Plait.

[slooh]

I appreciate your interest in SLOOH. In fact, we do process our credit cards securely through Verisign, and we are partnered with the Institute of Astrophysics in the Canary Islands, and the Hyde in Nebraska, who plan to use SLOOH for their live audience when it is cloudy at their observatory. We currently have a launch promotion you may want to take advantage of--if you become a member, you can make SLOOH available to a school for free.

http://www.slooh.com/promos/tfsm01.jsp


And, as always, SLOOH is free for a 7 day trial.

[Archer17]

slooh, what kind of response was that?!? Sounded "canned" (automated).. Turn the answering-machine off and explain yourself.

Jigsaw's questions were legitimate and your previous (non-automated) response was condescending to say the least. The credit card issue Jigsaw brings up would've been addressed by me if I intended to pursue what you offer and your response has set off alarm-bells here as well (especially after that 'canned' thing you replied with). Referring to Jigsaw as "Gidget" was jive. You're not going to make too many friends here if you show disrespect for Jigsaw or anyone else. You are the one that has something to prove here. Jigsaw represents herself well and has my respect .. you have a long way to go after what I've just read.

[slooh]

Of course no amount of explaining online will prove anything, but SLOOH is for real, and worth a closer look. over and out.

[Archer17]

Roger that! :wink:

[Musashi]

So wait, do you, slooh, run the Slooh observatory and/or website? If so, why can't you answer simple questions about the telescope(s)?

[Jigsaw]

I appreciate your interest in SLOOH. In fact, we do process our credit cards securely through Verisign, and we are partnered with the Institute of Astrophysics in the Canary Islands, and the Hyde in Nebraska, who plan to use SLOOH for their live audience when it is cloudy at their observatory. We currently have a launch promotion you may want to take advantage of--if you become a member, you can make SLOOH available to a school for free.

http://www.slooh.com/promos/tfsm01.jsp


And, as always, SLOOH is free for a 7 day trial.
I don't see this mentioned anywhere on their website.

Since they are open every Saturday night from 7 to 10 p.m., I will call them tomorrow night and ask them about their "partnership" with slooh.com.

I also note that their website says:Programs last about 20 minutes with 20 minute pauses in between so patrons can look through the telescopes between programs. Usually two programs are shown alternating throughout the evening. One programs is always a slide show about the current season's constellations.
If they can run whole slide shows for people in a projection room, why would they need slooh.com's single-monitor input of one randomly-chosen celestial object?

What I'm assuming is that someone joined slooh.com and opted for your free "schools" promotion, naming the Hyde Observatory.

http://www.slooh.com/promos/tfsm01.jsp
Slooh, the first online service to offer live viewing of outer space, will give away 1000 Slooh annual memberships to K-12 schools across the United States. The first 1000 individuals who sign up for a free trial of Slooh can choose a K-12 school of their choice to receive an annual membership of the service.

However, this doesn't make them a "partner". And I'd wonder whether they know you're prominently listing them as one on your website.

Also, you've got the following quote at the bottom of your web page:A great introduction to astronomy, with breathtaking live imagery even experts will appreciate. -- Bob Berman, Astronomy Magazine
I'd like to know what issue of Astronomy magazine that was, please.

[The Bad Astronomer]

Just to add my bit here, Slooh, the comment about Jigsaw, while not really an attack, was odd. I frown on personal attacks here. People here have been rigorously skeptical about SLOOH the product, but not about you the person.

I will admit I understand the skepticism. I exchanged several emails with the SLOOH advertising person some months ago, and my questions were never satisfactorily answered. I could not even find out why the name of the service is called SLOOH (in English, at least, moving a telescope is called "slewing"). The service provided was never really clear to me, either.

[Jigsaw]

And if you're using Verisign, why not just say, "We're using Verisign"? Why dance all around the issue of credit-card processing, with that not-very-believable "We've spent all our money on our telescopes and so we can't afford to pay a credit-card processing service" business?

Verisign only charges $949 for basic business service.

http://www.verisign.com/products/payflow/commerceSite/index.html

So, earlier today, you didn't even have $949 for that, having apparently elected not to concern yourself with "credit-card processing strategies"--but now this evening you suddenly discovered that you did, after all?

[nebularain]

All I can say is WOW!

:o :roll: :^o [-X #-o 8-[ =D> [-( 8)

[slooh]

Bad Astronomer,

I am a guest, and if I have broken protocol, then I apologize. I will gladly accept any criticism of SLOOH, the concept, ie, Gigsaw's initial comments were reasonable, and I responded in kind. And I would be most pleased to respond to any criticisms of SLOOH, the product, should any of you like to give it a try. However, I do take flippant comments that suggest SLOOH is a credit card scam personally, and as such, responded in kind.

[xouper]

Bad Astronomer,

I am a guest, and if I have broken protocol, then I apologize. I will gladly accept any criticism of SLOOH, the concept, ie, Gigsaw's initial comments were reasonable, and I responded in kind. And I would be most pleased to respond to any criticisms of SLOOH, the product, should any of you like to give it a try. However, I do take flippant comments that suggest SLOOH is a credit card scam personally, and as such, responded in kind.
Your apparent failure to grasp even the most fundamental principles of customer relations is not a good sign.

Regardless what questions a customer might ask, or complain about, a business should never make disparaging comments about any customer, as you did when you said, "You must have been treated unfairly in the past, perhaps by a girl as an impressionable youth, to have such a negative outlook."

Your comment may not have been a violation of the forum rules, but it was way out of line from a public relations standpoint. If this is the kind of treatment customers can expect in response to their concerns, I don't blame them for being less than enthusiastic about your service.

You have a wonderful opportunity on this forum to generate good will towards your company. Or not. Your choice, obviously.

[slooh]

The customer is always right. But you have to be a customer first.

[xouper]

The customer is always right. But you have to be a customer first.
So you think that insulting a potential customer is a good way to get more customers?

Do you think that anyone who witnessed your insult to "Gidget" will not be wondering if you intend to treat them the same way?

[slooh]

All are welcome at SLOOH, from the astronomy newbie to the PHD. The product is designed to let those who would like to participate passively just watch live missions to the best and brightest of outer space, while more serious astronomers like the crowd here can take control and move it on their own, eventually to anywhere they would like, with full control of the camera settings.

[Jigsaw]

And I would be most pleased to respond to any criticisms of SLOOH, the product, should any of you like to give it a try. However, I do take flippant comments that suggest SLOOH is a credit card scam personally, and as such, responded in kind.
"Flippant"--I do not think that word means what you think it means. "Flippant" means "lacking proper respect or seriousness". I was not "goofing around" or being silly when I was suggesting the possibility that slooh.com may just be a credit card scam--I was, and am, completely serious.

Slooh, I'm sitting here wondering why you're so reluctant to discuss your website--and your product--in anything other than the most general terms. You just keep giving us more advertising-speak, but no real information.

For example, we'd like more details about your telescope and observatory. Where exactly on Mount Teide is it located? Please give us more technical specs for the scope besides the rather meager, "c-14's; tele vue 85, sbig10's ; f/11 to f/4, depending on use, whether planets or deep space, and whether 1 degree or 5 degree on the wide field". What brand (manufacturer) of telescope is it? How many telescopes do you have, exactly? Your website is unclear on this point.

Also, I would like to hear your response to Musashi's questions:So wait, do you, slooh, run the Slooh observatory and/or website? If so, why can't you answer simple questions about the telescope(s)?
Do you run the observatory? Do you run the website? Again, why are you so reluctant to talk about your scope? Everybody else here--all the astronomy buffs I have ever met--would, literally, talk your ear off about telescopes, given the slightest opportunity. Yet, here you are, trying to sell a product to astronomy buffs, and you're as silent as the grave on the subject of your telescope, which after all, constitutes 99% of your product.

The website is just the medium--what counts is what kind of telescope you have, to astronomy buffs. Now, I suspect that what you're trying to do is pitch your product to non-astronomy buffs (whether because you genuinely think you see a market niche, or whether because you know that astronomy buffs will be onto you and will be asking precisely the kind of awkward questions that I've been asking), and thus you think you can get away with not having any tech stuff about scopes on your site, because, you reason, non-astronomy buffs won't be interested.

But, see, there you're missing a bet, because normally it only takes one or two stargazing outings to get someone hooked on astronomy, and the next thing you know they're in here asking what kind of scope should they buy. It doesn't take much to get someone hooked on astronomy. So what's going to happen is, if you're a legitimate businessman, you're going to get people who sign up for your product, and they're going to get hooked on astronomy, but after a while they'll find that slooh dot com isn't giving them what they need. They'll need to discuss tech specs about your scope--but you won't have them. So they'll get bored and let their membership lapse, and you'll be out that 50 bucks. Plus they won't recommend you to their friends. "Well, I was a member at slooh dot com for a while, but it got boring, save your money..."



So overall, Slooh, it's the way you keep coming back with nothing but more propaganda for your product, and your reluctance to talk about your observatory and your telescope, that now has my alarm bells ringing.

So something seems fishy to me, and I'm asking myself, quite reasonably I think, whether your website might not simply be some kind of credit card scam.

As I said earlier, all you have to do to prove you're not a scam is find someone in the Canary Islands astronomy community--or for that matter, at the Hyde Observatory--who can vouch for the fact that you're for real.

Or someone at a university? Some reasonably public person who has a telephone number and a job and an e-mail addy, so folks can ascertain that he's a real person, too.

[Jigsaw]

And another thing that sets my Alert Consumer bells ringin' like a three-alarm fire are misleading statements like this one.

All are welcome at SLOOH, from the astronomy newbie to the PHD. The product is designed to let those who would like to participate passively just watch live missions to the best and brightest of outer space, while more serious astronomers like the crowd here can take control and move it on their own, eventually to anywhere they would like, with full control of the camera settings.

Your product does not let the customer move the telescope to anywhere he would like, not even "eventually".

First, during group missions, the telescope(s) remain focused on one target, for 5, 10, or 15 minutes. Then it moves to the next target, which will be an object that is on slooh's "mission target" list.

Second, the serious astronomer cannot specify a target unless he pays EXTRA for the privilege of requesting a "solo" mission.

AND.

Third, he can have "any color car he wants--as long as it's black." The customer can choose to spend his solo mission only on any target that's on Slooh's mission list. Even if he's paid extra, if he wants to look at something that's not on the list, he's out of luck.

So your statement that "serious astronomers can take control and move the telescope anywhere they like" is--untrue.

[Kaptain K]

Well...I have digested what little info that slooh was willing to divulge (pulling teeth comes to mind) and as best as I can determine, the typical backyard telescope that they are comparing to is the department store 60mm (lookie, lookie - 525x!!!!) refractor on a spindly alt-az mount. The "44 times as powerful" is comparing the light gathering power of a 14" SCT to a 60mm refractor. The only "c-14" that I am aware of is the Celestron C14 SCT. The TV85 is a very good, premium refractor, but by their reasoning, it is only "twice as powerful" as a 60 mm scope. The SBIG 10 series is a top line CCD, but there are several variants in the line.

In short, if I want to look at pictures taken by somebody else of objects chosen by somebody else, APOD is free. Not only that, but APOD has images from truely world class scopes, including Hubble and Keck.

No thanks. I'll just save my money for a scope and CCD of my own.

[slooh]

Here is the definition of flippant that best applies to your comments:

Speaking fluently and confidently, without knowledge or consideration; empty; trifling; inconsiderate; pert; petulant.

[Kaptain K]

ISR is a better deal! :roll:

[The Bad Astronomer]

I think now would be a good time for people to take a step back, take a deep breath, and reconsider their posting style here.

I still think slooh's comment about Jigsaw was inappropriate, but after re-reading this thread, people are coming down pretty hard on slooh. I voiced my own misgivings earlier, but I think accusations or implications of credit fraud are going too far for sure.

slooh, as I said before, I was never given really solid descriptions of the service provided by your company when I exchanged emails with Wendy from your company. This made me suspicious, which is one reason why I never put anything up about your service on my Bad Astronomy site. Most of the questions being asked of you here are (in my opinion) relevant. In fact, though you may be burned a little by the posts here, I suggest you think about them and try to apply some of this to your site. I have read through it several times, and I am still not sure exactly what the service is or how it is different from many of the free robotic telescope services available.

As I have said many times before: I don't want apologies on this forum. I want results (http://www.badastronomy.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=4030).

[slooh]

Bad Astronomer

You are a reasonable leader, and that is why you have attracted a sizeable following. How about this as a next step--I will set you up with a free beta test account, and you give SLOOH a shake down over the next few weeks, and give it a review for your audience.

[Jigsaw]

That's nice, but that doesn't really prove anything.

BA, I'd like to clarify that I'm not directly accusing Slooh of running a scam, like, "You, sir, are a fraud!" I'm just saying that I think we should bear in mind it's a possibility, the same way you bear scams in mind whenever you're buying something from strangers over the Internet. Especially when they're asking you for a credit card number.

Now, my experience is that legitimate operations have their methods of secure credit card processing right up front--if they're using PayPal or Verisign, or whatever, they'll tell you. So all I'm saying is that what I've seen so far of slooh dot com leads me to suspect that it might be a scam.

But I will admit upfront that it's equally possible Slooh is just someone who has a slightly different business model than the one we're all used to, with some slightly different ideas of how much he should tell his customer, and how soon the customer becomes "right". As I originally said, hey, it's capitalism--if you think you see a market niche, go for it, and let the market decide.

Anyway, as far as I'm concerned, I'll drop this here and now. I don't have any kind of Mission From God to see that credit card fraud everywhere is stamped out.

And--Nebularain sure got an answer for the OP. "What do y'all think of this?" Well... :D

[milli360]

Bad Astronomer

You are a reasonable leader, and that is why you have attracted a sizeable following. How about this as a next step--I will set you up with a free beta test account, and you give SLOOH a shake down over the next few weeks, and give it a review for your audience.
I know the offer was only to the BA, but how about for everybody--the BA is busy whereas we've all got a lot of time to kill. There's only eight of us, nebularain, Jigsaw, Archer17, R.A.F., Kaptain K, Musashi, xouper and me.

[slooh]

Ok gang, I am game. A few ground rules. First, let's clean the slate. Jigsaw, I appreciate your last comments and apologize for being rude. In fact, the Verisign logo on the billing page is now on the do to list, thank you very much. And I hope this is the start of a dialog, more mutually civil this time around to be sure, of things you'd like to see on SLOOH. Keep in mind--we are a very small boot strapping start-up, so not everything happens as fast as I'd like.

Along these lines, please know that SLOOH is a work in progress--we have been up for 2 weeks or so, in beta mode, so it is still a bit buggy, and we have not yet introduced all of the features. FYI-people who have given their credit card have not been charged, and will not be charged until the beta test is over, and then the official 7 day free trial period will begin.

So, if any of the original 8 would like to participate, please email me and I will respond with a username and password. The rest of you, you'll have to give me your credit card, securely of course.

Best,

mike@slooh.com

[milli360]

I've sent my email

Dear Mr. Paolucci

Thank you for your offer to allow us to beta test your
telescope. I have been interested in participating in
something like this for a long time. Other sites have
offered it on a free basis, or a per hour basis, but
none of them have seemed to work out the details to
where it was worth spending the time at their website.

My Bad Astronomy screen name is milli360

The proof will be in the pudding, eh?

[astrographer]

Hi,

I'm the techie guy at Slooh. I'd be happy to answer technical questions about Slooh. I designed and built the observatory. I designed programmed the code that runs the observatory.

Matt

[The Bad Astronomer]

I designed programmed the code that runs the observatory.


Hmmm... I may indeed want to chat with you. We are developing our own robotic observatory at Sonoma State University. What software do you use to remotely control the 'scope and detectors? And do you do routine calibration processing (dark, flat, bias)? We're having fits (haha) trying to figure out what software to use to do the calibration. I don't have time right now, but I'll post more about this later.

[astrographer]

We use MaxIm. Just bias and dark master frames at this point. I'm pleased with the features and stability of MaxIm (Slooh's requirements are among the most exacting), especially the support for ASCOM. The upcoming release of MaxIm will include improved calibration functionality.

Matt

[Jigsaw]

Ok gang, I am game. A few ground rules. First, let's clean the slate. Jigsaw, I appreciate your last comments and apologize for being rude. In fact, the Verisign logo on the billing page is now on the do to list, thank you very much. And I hope this is the start of a dialog, more mutually civil this time around to be sure, of things you'd like to see on SLOOH. Keep in mind--we are a very small boot strapping start-up, so not everything happens as fast as I'd like.

Along these lines, please know that SLOOH is a work in progress--we have been up for 2 weeks or so, in beta mode, so it is still a bit buggy, and we have not yet introduced all of the features. FYI-people who have given their credit card have not been charged, and will not be charged until the beta test is over, and then the official 7 day free trial period will begin.

So, if any of the original 8 would like to participate, please email me and I will respond with a username and password. The rest of you, you'll have to give me your credit card, securely of course.

Best,

mike@slooh.com
Okay, cool, I'm game. E-mail on the way.

[Kaptain K]

I'll pass.

[SirThoreth]

Whoa, just jumped into this thread - dang!

Anyway, everyone participating, keep us posted. Y'all got me curious, now. ^_^

[nebularain]

Thanks for the offer, slooh! But I decided to let those who know what they are doing proceed with the evalutation.

Thanks!

[Jigsaw]

Well, so far all I've received in response to my e-mail to mike@slooh.com, which read simply...

Hi, this is Jigsaw from the Bad Astronomy Bulletin Board, come to get my user name and password for my free trial.

... is this message:

thank you for your interest. I'll be back to you soon with a username and password.

mp

So.

[slooh]

from this site's rules page:

* Do not post private email you have received without express permission of the sender. This is very impolite, to say the least. The first time, you will be warned. The second time, you will be banned.

[milli360]

Got mine. I'll check it out later.

[slooh]

http://www.badastronomy.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=10382

[The Bad Astronomer]

Yes, posting private email is usually a no-no. In this case, the email didn't have any "private" content, so it's no biggie, but in the future have a care before posting such things.

I am pleased we are working this out so well! That's the whole purpose of the FAQ for this board.

And for MaxIm, we use it as well. Our efforts are to have a fully robotic telescope that can be used over the Internet by students. When they get the data, they need a GUI to calibrate and analyze the data. MaxIm is not bad, but we're still open to other possibilities. Some other folks are using an executable IDL script, and it can be modified for our use with some effort (I have spent years programming in IDL, so I think it may fall on my head to do it!). Anyway, cool, thanks for answering.

[Tensor]

(I have spent years programming in IDL, so I think it may fall on my head to do it!).

Think of it as Job Security. :D

[Jigsaw]

Still no password or user name. Nor any kind of explanatory e-mail.

Slooh, what's the holdup?

[slooh]

I said I would give you a free chance to try it. I posted a message 'cleaning the slate'. Then I found you had previously posted a message outside of this flow, to see if the Hyde relationship was for real. When Dave Hamilton of Hyde posted that the relationship was for real, you didn't bother to acknowledge as much to the gang here. Then you posted my private email to you on this board, and as of yet, you have not responded in kind to my offer of good faith. So, given the history, I am having a hard time convincing myself that you will be able to render an objective opinion of SLOOH.

[Jigsaw]

Well, let's look at some times here, shall we? All times are CST.

09 Jan 2004 22:09 I post the query thread in BABBling.

10 Jan 2004 22:01 I e-mail you with my request for password and user name, as per your offer.

11 Jan 2004 13:36 I check my e-mail to find that you have not sent it yet, that you say "wait". I post the relevant e-mail.

11 Jan 2004 14:07 You post, objecting to my posting your e-mail. You do not mention the query thread.

11 Jan 2004 15:58 Response by DaveHamilton in the query thread.

11 Jan 2004 16:14 You post a link to the query thread.

12 Jan 2004 13:25 I ask you, "What's the holdup?"

And on 12 Jan 2004 13:45 -- THEN, and only THEN, do you tell me that you're not going to give me one:

I said I would give you a free chance to try it. I posted a message 'cleaning the slate'. Then I found you had previously posted a message outside of this flow, to see if the Hyde relationship was for real. When Dave Hamilton of Hyde posted that the relationship was for real, you didn't bother to acknowledge as much to the gang here. Then you posted my private email to you on this board, and as of yet, you have not responded in kind to my offer of good faith. So, given the history, I am having a hard time convincing myself that you will be able to render an objective opinion of SLOOH.

You found out about the query thread a WHOLE DAY EARLIER. And it took you 24 hours to decide to be miffed? Your sense of injury would be more convincing if you hadn't waited so long, if you had immediately come roaring into this thread hollering, "All right, Jigsaw, no password for YOU! You went over my head, to BABBling!!"

You have some kind of objection to my trying to find out if the "Hyde relationship" is for real?

I have no idea what you mean by "responding in kind to your offer of good faith". :-s This wasn't good enough for you?

But I will admit upfront that it's equally possible Slooh is just someone who has a slightly different business model than the one we're all used to, with some slightly different ideas of how much he should tell his customer, and how soon the customer becomes "right". As I originally said, hey, it's capitalism--if you think you see a market niche, go for it, and let the market decide.

Anyway, as far as I'm concerned, I'll drop this here and now. I don't have any kind of Mission From God to see that credit card fraud everywhere is stamped out.

I said I was going to drop the issue of credit card fraud. You apologized for being rude and said you were going to send me a user name and password. I said, "Okay, cool". So I thought we had an agreement.

As for "acknowledging that Dave Hamilton" is real, well, actually, I sent him an e-mail this morning, since he so considerately used his e-mail addy as his nick (because, actually, now I'm just plain curious as to how an observatory in Nebraska got matched up with an observatory in the Canary Islands). When I get it back, when I'm convinced that he's a real person, THEN I'll "acknowledge that the relationship is for real". However, just having someone register at the BABB and say, "I'm Dave Hamilton and I say that Slooh is for real" doesn't count, sorry. Anybody can do that.

And if it's going to make you huffy that I went over your head (again) by sending him an e-mail, well, deal with it, I guess.

As for posting a private e-mail, well, even the Bad Astronomer had to admit there wasn't anything terribly "private" about a message telling me to wait. I will abide by his wishes and not post any more. Actually, it didn't even occur to me that that particular e-mail "counted", because all it was, was a sort of generic "thank you for your order, be assured that your business is important to us" form letter or something. It wasn't like you were giving away any trade secrets.

I have to say that this all sounds like you're simply grasping at straws, seizing on any possible excuse to avoid giving me a password and user name.

But like I said, I'm not making any allegations of fraud--just that you seem to have a very peculiar business model going there.

And even if I did give your product a bad review--so what? It's not like my voice carries any weight anywhere. Nobody's going to "not" buy your product because "Jigsaw of the BABB" said it wasn't worth fifty bucks (which I have already said, you know, way back at the beginning).

Anyway, suit yourself.

[slooh]

Then I'll look forward to you clearing my name with everyone, once you prove to yourself that Dave is in fact a real human being, and we can proceed from there.

[DJ]

Jigsaw, I think you are way way way out of line. To be a good skeptic does not require you to tip your hand that your beliefs are crystalized and unmovable. You are almost treating slooh as if he has already committed fraud against you personally, and you're now the board's Ralph Nader.

slooh - I did not enter this thread lightly, but must call this as I see it. The burden now upon you is to prove me right, that you are really doing this thing.

I had a similar idea about 12 months ago, using a very similar setup. I think the idea will have a lot of value in the educational community. Every telescope I ever got to try as a kid was old and busted. Not a very good way to bring someone into the fold. After a 25 year hiatus, I'm lucky to be in a position to have my own gear and enjoy nights in the backyard with the CCD.

[Ulster]

edit

[DJ]

i dunno, ulster, if in our first handshake i called you a fraud or a scam, you probably would not want me as your customer. think about it.

"Well, Mr. Ulster, this is a very nice phone system you're showing me today. However, I think you and your company are a complete fraud."

I cannot attest to slooh's operating methodology - so I'm taking an incredible credibility risk. But that's neither here nor there - overt loss of civility is. Everyone has the right to prove or disprove their claims. Seems like that's in process. Perhaps Mr. Paolucci does not have the best words at his fingertips. That in itself is quite excusable.

Having a site that doesn't do what it's supposed to - not excusable.

[siriusastronomer]

I'm inclined to agree with Jigsaw.
Though it would seem that slooh has kept a "cooler head" in not ranting angrily about Jigsaw's alleged accusations, Jigsaw has brought up several good points. It seems that slooh's refusal to allow Jigsaw to participate in the "freebie," or whatever you want to call it, is unreasonable, biased and discriminatory. Slooh promised her a free trial and is now revoking that promise.
Slooh, its not up to you to decide whether or not Jigsaw will "be able to render an objective opinion of SLOOH" it IS up to you to give her a fair chance. You're not winning in depriving her of his "free trial" and it's not like you're loosing a ton of money, she's not going to buy into without the trial first (if she does at all). So why go through the grief of being publicly humilated if you can just prove to Jigsaw that her allegations are false? Wouldn't that be easier??

Just my two cents!

[slooh]

I am sure someone on this board with more credibility than jigsaw will step up, give it a try and tell everyone here it is actually real, so we can get on to more substantive issues. DJ, I appreciate your philosophy.

[Musashi]

I'm still waiting for someone with more credability than Slooh to post the stats of their equipment and how they dervied the 44x's better spiel.

[Normandy6644]

I am sure someone on this board with more credibility than jigsaw will step up, give it a try and tell everyone here it is actually real, so we can get on to more substantive issues. DJ, I appreciate your philosophy.

This is the beginning of a personal attack. Now this appears to be a very useful thread and it would be a shame to get it locked because people are squabbling like children. Let's keep this clean and factual so that we may get some real information here.

[Jigsaw]

Jigsaw, I think you are way way way out of line. To be a good skeptic does not require you to tip your hand that your beliefs are crystalized and unmovable. You are almost treating slooh as if he has already committed fraud against you personally, and you're now the board's Ralph Nader.

< snip >

i dunno, ulster, if in our first handshake i called you a fraud or a scam, you probably would not want me as your customer. think about it.

"Well, Mr. Ulster, this is a very nice phone system you're showing me today. However, I think you and your company are a complete fraud."

Er, sorry, DJ, evidently you did not take the time to read the entire thread. Go back and look at my first two posts in this thread--at the beginning I did not say WORD ONE about Slooh's credibility. All I said was that overall I didn't think the service provided was worth fifty bucks a month. And that was it.

The issue of Slooh's credibility didn't even COME UP until after Slooh had given what I thought were two rather evasive answers to a couple of quite normal--and simple--technical questions from Kaptain K concerning his telescopes. That was when I went back to his website and viewed it with a more critical consumer's eye.

So please don't try to make out like this thread is some kind of personal Ralph Nader vendetta on MY part against Slooh, because it isn't. I originally started out just giving my opinion on his service.

[Musashi]

I have been reading this thread since the beggining, and I would have to agree with Jigsaw here. Calling her Gidget was totally uncalled for, but I guess that is what you get if you question Slooh's representative here. :-?

[tngolfplayer]

I have been following this long for a while and just have a couple of questions. I own an Orion 8" Skyview pro and a SAC 7 CCd. I find that this combo gives me, my neighbors, my family, and anybody who visits my website the oppurtunity to be introduced to the beauty of the night sky. I think the oppurtunity to use research caliber equipment would be a dream come true. However, like the process involved in buying my equipment, I like to fully understand what I am purchasing. My only suggestion is to put more info on your website about your equipment, services etc... I really wouldn't mind paying for the chance to use research grade equipment, if I knew exactly what I was getting.


PS, The "fits" pun was clever B.A.

[The Bad Astronomer]

In my own opinion I think both sides are being way too sensitive here. A lot of posts came out on the offensive against slooh, and he responded defensively, which is not surprising.

As I posted before (hint hint) I strongly suggest people take a step back, relax, and rethink their posting style here.

[astrographer]

Hi TNGolfPlayer,

I'd be happy to answer any questions you have about Slooh's equipment or generally about imaging with CCD (or film).

Matt
http://slooh.com
http://starmatt.com

[Pinemarten]

Do you have any photos of your site(s) online?

[Kaptain K]

I'm still waiting for someone with more credability than Slooh to post the stats of their equipment and how they dervied the 44x's better spiel. On page two of this thread I posted:
. . . The "44 times as powerful" is comparing the light gathering power of a 14" SCT to a 60mm refractor. . .

[milli360]

I dunno, maybe Musashi is asking about 44 specifically. I get (14"/60mm)^2 is 35, not 44.

[Kaptain K]

I dunno, maybe Musashi is asking about 44 specifically. I get (14"/60mm)^2 is 35, not 44.
You are neglecting the central obstruction of the SCT. You have to subtract the area of the secondary from the area of the primary.

[Jigsaw]

Having received an e-mail back from Dave Hamilton, I am willing to concede he's a real person. :D

Now can I have my user name and password?

[sts60]

I'm wasn't particularly interested in plunking down $49, but that's not a judgment on SLOOH - I think it's a reasonably neat idea. I'm afraid, though, that I am even less inclined after some of Mr. Paolucci's posts on this thread. Someone drops in out of nowhere - though, to be fair, in reply to a question - with a nice website and asks for $49, but offers few specifics - in particular, nothing about the astronomical facilties, and this on an astronomy board.

While some of the details have since been revealed, in my opinion he has been rather discourteous to those who questioned him. In particular, the crack about "more credibility than Jigsaw" (at least spelling her handle right this time) is quite annoying. She has been a consistent and interesting member of this board, and frankly has more credibility than a newcomer who gets PO'd when questioned about his product. Her questions and skepticism were not out of line.

[Prester John]

So what are the specifications of the telescope used ?

[slooh]

I welcome criticisms of the product. Incidentally, I find it rather biased that many posters on this board seem to think it is ok for people to throw around unsubstantiated accusations of fraud, but find it necessary to lecture me about the civility of my response to it. Which is the more serious offense?

[milli360]

I dunno, maybe Musashi is asking about 44 specifically. I get (14"/60mm)^2 is 35, not 44.
You are neglecting the central obstruction of the SCT. You have to subtract the area of the secondary from the area of the primary.
I thought he would be talking about a 60mm refractor

[Normandy6644]

I welcome criticisms of the product. Incidentally, I find it rather biased that many posters on this board seem to think it is ok for people to throw around unsubstantiated accusations of fraud, but find it necessary to lecture me about the civility of my response to it. Which is the more serious offense?

Don't you see that no one is accusing you of fraud, but merely being skeptical (rightly so) about a product? This is a golden opportunity for you, since if you eradicate the skepticism I'm sure MANY members of this board will become more interested and perhaps become members of your site/product.

[astrographer]

A lot of people think that the fundamental power of a telescope is its magnification capability. They think, wow, a 1000x telescope must be a really good thing! You can buy $50 60mm telescope, stick a barlow on it and a high-power eyepiece, and voila, you have a 1000x telescope that's of no use whatsoever! The problem is it doesn't gather enough light, right?

So, a buying Meade 16 solves the problem, right? It has 44 times the light gathering capability (of the 60mm scope) and has plenty of light for 1000x. Problem solved, right! Oh, you don't have an observatory? So you're going to carry that 70lb tube and the 120lb mount in and out of your house (on icy steps in the winter) to the back yard every time you use it? I don't think so. Once I set it up and crank it up to 1000x, I can't see a darn thing. I can't find anything; the stupid computer thingee doesn't work. Sometimes I can find a star in the eyepiece, but it jitters like crazy and looks like it's swimming in a river. So the 44 times aperture isn't so useful by itself. Also, my kids need to be asleep by 8:30pm, so astronomy in the Summer isn't going to work for them. And it's so cold, astronomy in the Winter isn't going to work for me. I can heat the observatory, right? (not)

So let's build an observatory. This is a complex expensive project. What parts do I buy? How do I hook them together? Uh, it need to be in a convenient location, so let's put it in my back yard. Oops, I live in an area with severe light pollution, and I can't even see mag 4 stars. Light pollution filters will help me, right? Nope, the truth is that for visual observation, such filters have limited benefit, especially for broad spectrum objects like galaxies.

Hmm, what if I build the observatory somewhere dark, like, two hours North from here? OK, need to buy some land. Need electricity. Need four wheel drive to get up steep icy road. Need cabin to sleep in. Now every time I go up there, I have a 50% chance that the weather's going to be good enough. I guess I'll need TV in the cabin to give me something to do.

How about if I build an observatory in Arizona? Much clearer and darker there. I could fly out for 10 days at a stretch for a few times per year. Getting expensive and certainly not convenient. Let's make the observatory robotic and put it on the Internet! I can run it from home any night of the year, with my slippers on! Hmm, well I'll have to throw a lot of money at it. I hope I can get an ISP at the observatory. I'll need at least one computer there. I'll need to wire things up. I'll need a motorized focuser. Oops, my mount isn't designed for remote use. I'll have to buy a $10,000 mount. Wow, wiring this stuff up is complicated. So many problems to solve, like flexure, weatherproofing, remote monitoring, need a weather system, jeepers I have to lock down the mirror? What if the setup breaks while I'm using it remotely? It'll take me years to solve all these problems.

When faced with all of these problems, the average person, would not bother with astronomy at all. The average person wants to see cool stuff at low cost and high convenience. And they want to share it with their kids.

Did you know that Slooh's most popular scope is only 85mm in diameter? What use is a puny scope like that? It provides great views of the Orion Nebula and NGC 1977, M31 and the Pleiades. Oh, we also have a C-14 in service, too.

So what's really important about the equipment?

Matt

[Musashi]

I think that the importance of the equipment is that it is being used as a selling point. Then, there are no specifics on the site. Then slooh was acting, in my opinion, a bit dodgy about the specifics. It helps, when selling something, to know your product.

sloooh: It is not ok to throw around unsustantiated accusations of fraud. Luckily, no one has done that yet. However, even if they had, there is a pithy saying, "Two worngs do not make a right." Furthermore, there are diffenet levels of serious here. To you, it might be more serious to be accused of fraud. To your potential customers, it might be more serious to see how you deal with people.

[tngolfplayer]

My main issues when buying/looking at a scope is focal length, and light gathering capabilities. Since I primarily use my scope for astrophotography, a good equatorial mount is also a concern, plus for DSO's, I want a "fast" focal length so I don't have to take as long exposures, and so I don't have to focus through a focal reducer. I own a goto scope but prefer the use my setting circles and star hop to find my targets. Even from my light polluted backyard and a 40 mm eyepiece(which I love), I can see m42/m43, most major galaxies(mag 6 or better) and depending on filter, I can see outlines of most nebula(horsehead, flame, running man, m76.....). I rarely get above 100x, and when I do it is because I added a 3x barlow to my 40mm.

[xouper]

I welcome criticisms of the product. Incidentally, I find it rather biased that many posters on this board seem to think it is ok for people to throw around unsubstantiated accusations of fraud, but find it necessary to lecture me about the civility of my response to it. Which is the more serious offense?
That's not even the right question. Aside from the fact that no one has accused you of fraud (as Normandy6644 has already observed), the question is not who's the worse offender. It's about who has the most to lose here, the people on this forum, or your company? A better question is, can you afford to alienate potential customers by your lack of civility? And I'm not just talking about the people on this forum, but also about the effect that word of mouth can have on your company's reputation. This is basic stuff in Customer Relations 101. I'm not lecturing you, I'm trying to be helpful. When people ask me about your company, which would you prefer I tell them - that you were courteous and helpful and answered all questions, or that you were disrespectful and defensive? That is the question you should be asking yourself instead of "which is the more serious offense".

[slooh]

SLOOH is designed to make astronomy accessible and affordable for everyone. But regardless of why it will be appealing to a broad spectrum of users, I would think the main reason it would be of interest to people here is because they would get to see the kind of imaging that can be done with high end equipment, at one of the best astronomical sites on earth, by a leading astrophotographer.

[astrographer]

My main issues when buying/looking at a scope is focal length, and light gathering capabilities. Since I primarily use my scope for astrophotography,
I think a TV-85 is a super scope for AP. Very portable, great optics, great mechanics, has the accessories you need. Works great at f/5.6.
a good equatorial mount is also a concern,
I think Losmandy mounts provide the best bang for the buck for portable setups.
plus for DSO's, I want a "fast" focal length so I don't have to take as long exposures, and so I don't have to focus through a focal reducer.
Focus is a very important subject. For film, I use a knife edge focuser I built myself. For CCD you can focus using MaxIm.
I own a goto scope but prefer the use my setting circles and star hop to find my targets.
All of my AP in the first three years was without goto.
Even from my light polluted backyard and a 40 mm eyepiece(which I love), I can see m42/m43, most major galaxies(mag 6 or better) and depending on filter, I can see outlines of most nebula(horsehead, flame, running man, m76.....).
Not easy to take photos like these (http://starmatt.com) or observe these objects visually from a light polluted location.
I rarely get above 100x, and when I do it is because I added a 3x barlow to my 40mm.
For visual, I recommend a Dob like my 10" f/4.5.

[milli360]

A lot of people think that the fundamental power of a telescope is its magnification capability. They think, wow, a 1000x telescope must be a really good thing! You can buy $50 60mm telescope, stick a barlow on it and a high-power eyepiece, and voila, you have a 1000x telescope that's of no use whatsoever! The problem is it doesn't gather enough light, right?
Although I see where you are going with the rest of your post, and I agree for the most part, the problem isn't just that it doesn't gather enough light--large light buckets are in general preferable at any magnification. With the smaller aperture, diffraction effects are greater, and they affect the view at a lower magnification. The rule of thumb limit to how much you can "push" the magnification (2x per mm, or 50x per inch) is mostly driven by the diffraction (but is computed for average seeing conditions I think).

[astrographer]

Hi Milli360,

A light bucket does not fix the problem entirely. A 10" Dob can work great, but...
* You need to live someplace dark and clear, and the vast majority of people don't.
* Or you can drive two hours to a dark site, but most people aren't willing to load up the car, fight traffic, put on the long underwear (or mosquito spray) and stand around at night in the wilderness, with coyotes howling.
* Simple as a Dob is, you still need skills to operate it.
* What about the kids?

[milli360]

I should have made myself more clear. :)

The problem is it doesn't gather enough light, right?

No, I disagree.

The view of the moon, for instance, through the small scope at 1000x is going to be worse, because of diffraction, than the view through your 14" at 1000x--even if you use a moon filter to filter down the 14" to a comparable level of brightness.

Not that I'd ever been using a 14" at 1000x.

[astrographer]

A 60mm scope may be fine for the moon, assuming it is on a decent mount with a decent eyepiece. But a pair of 10x50's is much more versatile.

A C-14 is no good at 1000x either, unless you have <0.5" seeing. Even amateur AO may not help.

My point is that people focus too much on optics, when it's actually overall usability that is the most important factor, when considering what setup to buy/use.

[milli360]

I'm beginning to see a problem... :)

[Jigsaw]

Me too--I don't have my user name or password yet.

I conceded that Dave was a real person, Slooh--what more do you want?

[mutant]

Well, I have been reading these posts for 4 pages now, quite a bit of which seem to be arguments just for the sake of arguing.

I went and checked the site out and it was presentable with not a huge amount of info but I assume they are trying to attract people, including novices, who would like to view the heavens but dont have the means or the energy to do so, altho I could be wrong.

My only problem is that I have never, and will never order anything on any website using a credit card. This certainly is not an accusation but just an observation from many examples of bad experiences I have heard about and I will not take chances with my money or credit record. If I find something I want that is available on a site I will call them and make arrangements to send the money by money order etc.

Other than that I think the site is fairly well presented and I like the idea. I am certainly not intelligent enough to evaluate the technical aspects. I will do with this what I do with any other new idea I hear about and that is wait about 6 months and keep track of its progress. If everything is what is was said to be then I will probably jump in and give it a try.

In the meantime, best of luck to SLOOH and I hope everything works out for you. :D

[Charlie in Dayton]

My question is this:

Is slooh's main objective to be a site where you can look thru a telescope and see what's out there, or a site where you can remotely control the scope, take a stack of images, and get them sent to you so you can process them digitally?

If the first, good luck -- you'll see less than you would with your eye to the scope, because of camera and monitor resolution issues. If the second, there's real potentiial here -- this has been done before, from other locations, very successfully.

If I knew what I was doing (and there's a person in my area who's got an international reputation in this sort of thing -- might bribe him with a root beer to talk shop for awhile), and it's the case of the second instance above, with a few extra bucks in pocket I'd be sorely tempted to give it a crack. Like I said, though, training first.

[milli360]

My question is this:

Is slooh's main objective to be a site where you can look thru a telescope and see what's out there, or a site where you can remotely control the scope, take a stack of images, and get them sent to you so you can process them digitally?

If the first, good luck -- you'll see less than you would with your eye to the scope, because of camera and monitor resolution issues. If the second, there's real potentiial here -- this has been done before, from other locations, very successfully.
Kind of a combination of both, it seems. The image improves as you watch it.

[slooh]

jigsaw,

I am ready for you to join the SLOOH beta test--you'll need flash 7, and please read the communication as posted in Mission Control on the Launch Pad, so you will understand the phased nature of the test. Missions start at 4pm est today, usually earlier, but today we are doing internal tests from 2pm to 4pm.

Enjoy.

[Ulster]

Michael, it is very difficult to understand why you do not post more specifics on your equipment. I think that would go a long way towards changing the nature of this thread.

Not giving important details of your equipment is analogous to going to the fair and forking over 49 bucks for a freak show that promises an alligator woman. Maybe for 25 cents, but not 49 bucks :-)

[slooh]

Hi Ulster,

I'd be happy to answer any questions you have about Slooh's equipment or generally about imaging with CCD (or film).

Matt
http://slooh.com
http://starmatt.com

[Jigsaw]

Okay, test of slooh.com.

From 5:27 a.m. to 5:50 a.m. there, 11:27 p.m. to 11:50 CST here.

I'm looking at what's labeled "moon". It's a huge white blob. The moon is supposed to be waning, but this looks like a perfectly round rather blurry white blob. It doesn't look like the "moon", waning or not. It's just a blob. It's too bright to see the surface of the moon properly. There are three smaller blobs (stars) around it. It says "LIVE" at the bottom.

Clicking on the storytellers doesn't work. They're not online yet?
There is a slider at the left by the storytellers. It doesn't seem to do anything yet.


The Image buttons work better with the window maximized with F-11 (I'm using Internet Explorer).

I clicked on "Music" and it said "loading", but then nothing happened. But that could just be my computer being stupid.

Five buttons at the top left--give:

1. Right ascension and declination, altitude and azimuth.

Right ascension and declination are zeros all the way across. Altitude and azimuth keep progressing.

2. Short blurb on the Moon.

3. Local weather. Good idea.

4. Observatory latitude and longitude: +28' 18' 14.833319999" -16' 30' 30.00000000".

Dome state--[blank]
Inside Temperature--says "NA".
Dome azimuth--[blank].

5. Scope Activity--exposing.
Focuser State and Focuser Position--[blank].
Filter--None.
Binning--[blank]
Cooler Power--39%
Chip Temperature-- -15.2 C



Okay, so, I sat here and looked at a white blob for 20 minutes. It didn't look like the moon. It was too bright to see anything, you couldn't see any detail. I can see much more detail with a pair of binoculars out in the backyard. And the stars around it just looked like--stars. Round white things. I couldn't view any constellations--just those particular three stars.

So all in all, I'm going to have to stick with my preliminary opinion from back on Page 1 and say that IMO this isn't something I personally would pay money for. Sorry. But thanks for the chance to look it over. :)

[Pinemarten]

They may be working out the 'bugs'?

[milli360]

Yes, it is in beta test.

I too looked at the moon last night on Slooh. Unfortunately, I didn't save any screen captures of the view of the moon--I thought I had, previously. The view I saw showed a portion of the terminator, and about half of the illuminated part of the moon. The image was reversed left to right, and I could see considerable detail. I'm not sure why Jigsaw saw a white blob--neither of the two views, all sky or wide field, showed a white blob. The other view, high magnification, will not always be available, and is just coming on line, according to some of the notes I've read.

Last night, while I was on, the only two views available were the Orion Nebula and the moon, and the mission switched back and forth between them. I listened to the audio commentaries with no problem. The voices were pleasant, with a bit of drama. I have also listened to the music, although I prefer my own.

The main page at Slooh.com (http://www.slooh.com/) says you can sign up for a free seven-day risk free trial offer, which probably would get the same capabilities that I am seeing with the beta account. It also has a sneak peak (http://www.slooh.com/sneakpeekjs.html) that presents an image of one of the main controllers and it will explain the functions as you move the cursor around.

I've captured a few screen shots of the main screens. This is the first screen (http://sentient.home.mindspring.com/dan/SLOOH00.JPG) that comes up after you log on. The missions scroll across the bottom. As you can see, the other night (1/11), the Andromeda galaxy was also available. The mission control screen (http://sentient.home.mindspring.com/dan/SLOOH04.JPG) was supposed to be targeted on the nebula in Orion, but the calibration appears to be off.

As it trained itself on Andromeda, the view gradually improved, from totally dark to light detail (http://sentient.home.mindspring.com/dan/SLOOH02.JPG) to more detail (http://sentient.home.mindspring.com/dan/SLOOH03.JPG). The views were cool.

Check out this view of the Orion nebula (http://sentient.home.mindspring.com/dan/SLOOH05.JPG). After a minute or two, the image showed ghosting (http://sentient.home.mindspring.com/dan/SLOOH06.JPG), perhaps an artifact of how they were stacking the images. Later, during a different mission portion, the image was reversed (http://sentient.home.mindspring.com/dan/SLOOH10.JPG), and as I watched, a streak appeared (offcenter to the right) and progressed up the screen (http://sentient.home.mindspring.com/dan/SLOOH11.JPG). It was too late to be a satellite, so my curiosity has been tweaked.

[slooh]

jigsaw,

you were looking at the moon through just the allskycamera --you have to click on the wide field and high mag buttons, below the main viewport, to see the object through the telescopes. It will take ~60 seconds from the start of the mission for the object to appear.

[slooh]

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/15/technology/circuits/15star.html

January 15, 2004
An Online Telescope for the Starry-Eyed
By Henry Fountain

"....Slooh.com's telescopes, which Mr. Paolucci described as "top-of-the-line consumer equipment," are in the Canary Islands, off the coast of North Africa. Viewing hours (weather permitting, of course) are from 2 p.m. to midnight Eastern time. That may be Slooh.com's best feature - the chance to view the night sky when it's still light outside." Henry Fountain

[Kaptain K]

slooh,
Since you like to quote the FAQ, please note #5 (just under the one about private e-mails).

#5 Do not post copyrighted material here. It is within the law to post small, relevant quotes, but not whole passages from newspapers, magazines, books, etc. If you do, the post will be deleted, and you will be warned. This is very serious. I won't have anyone breaking the law on my site, especially copyright laws. Do it twice and you will be banned.
You cut and pasted the entire piece! [-X

[Jigsaw]

Er, well, it's basically just a press release, and I think he can quote his own press release word-for-word if he wants to. :D

you were looking at the moon through just the allskycamera --you have to click on the wide field and high mag buttons, below the main viewport, to see the object through the telescopes. It will take ~60 seconds from the start of the mission for the object to appear.

Right, but I did fiddle with the three buttons for the entire time and it seemed like nothing I did changed it from a big round white blurry blob.

I see that the narration is up today, though. The storytellers and the music are nice, too.

What does the slider marked "mount" do?

Also, I think you should put "Requires Flash 7" upfront somewhere, so folks will know ahead of time.

[Kaptain K]

Er, well, it's basically just a press release, and I think he can quote his own press release word-for-word if he wants to.
Nope. It is commentary on a press release and therefore copyrighted material of NYT.

[slooh]

the mount microphone is not hooked up yet, but when it is you will be able to hear the motors in the dome

I am glad you like the storytellers--written by Bob Berman of Astronomy Magazine.

by the way, it is a little hazy tonight, so imaging is not as great as the last few nights...but all part of the fun.

[astrographer]

The other view, high magnification, will not always be available, and is just coming on line, according to some of the notes I've read.
Right, we (Slooh) are showing high mag on just the moon right now. Within a few days we will be showing planets.
Later, during a different mission portion, the image was reversed
Our mount has to flip when it crosses the meridian. For the time being, I haven't been re-orienting the images North up, but I'll probably do that sometime.
as I watched, a streak appeared (offcenter to the right) and progressed up the screen. It was too late to be a satellite, so my curiosity has been tweaked.
It might well have been a satellite. Even moonlight can light one up enough to be caught in the photo. I see satellite trails all the time when I image. Some people like to see those trails, but I when they get in my photos, I think they're just space junk.

[tuffel999]

There is an editorial or some sort of short article in this month's astronomy magazine about Slooh. In case anyone is interested.

[The Bad Astronomer]

Is that a color CCD on the telescope? I was surprised to see color views of M31 and M42. Nice images.

[astrographer]

All of Slooh's CCD cameras are monochromatic. However, each of the cameras has a color filter wheel (except our allsky). Our software instructs the cameras, filter wheels, focusers etc to take exposures through red, green and blue filters. The software then combines the exposures using correct weighting, which yields images that have natural color balance. The colors you see in Slooh images are real.

Matt

[freddo]

The colors you see in Slooh images are real.

Heh... Well as far as the 'true color' argument goes, it looks as close to naked eye color as you could hope..

[astrographer]

Heh... Well as far as the 'true color' argument goes, it looks as close to naked eye color as you could hope..

Thanks! For all deep sky objects, Slooh uses the same exposure durations and color combination weightings. In other words, the same recipe is used for M42, M45, M31 etc. Unlike astro-imagers' hand-tuned images (e.g. http://starmatt.com), Slooh's colors are objective. In Slooh's images, the core of M31 is gold, not because we imagine it ought to be, but because it is gold. The nebulosity in M45 is blue, with touches of green and red because it is that way. And M42 is just a riot.

Of course every filter set has limitations, but we are using excellent filters.

Matt

[The Bad Astronomer]

Well, you can't add nebulosity images the same way as continuum sources like a star using the same filter set. Nebulae don't emit light the same way.

But that's impressive software if it is done automatically. I assume you take a series of calibration and target images, median filter them, calibrate, register, and coadd? What software do you use? I mean, what platform (IRAF, IDL)?

[astrographer]

Well, you can't add nebulosity images the same way as continuum sources like a star using the same filter set. Nebulae don't emit light the same way. [/qoute]

Assuming the filter set passbands handle the O-III lines similarly to the human eye, I think you can. Against what objective standard you would balance emission nebulae colors?

For some filter sets, adding in O-III to green/blue helps.

Also, reflection nebulae like M45 are broadband sources, so in any case, there's little concern about them.

[quote=The Bad Astronomer]
But that's impressive software if it is done automatically. I assume you take a series of calibration and target images, median filter them, calibrate, register, and coadd? What software do you use? I mean, what platform (IRAF, IDL)?

It's all automatic. What 17 herbs and spices does the Colonel use in his KFC? He'll never tell. 8)

Matt

Is that a color CCD on the telescope? I was surprised to see color views of M31 and M42. Nice images.

I am impressed. We are hard pressed with our 0.46 m RC to get good color images so quickly. It might be nice if information on exposure times etc. was available in the site.

[beskeptical]

Well, you can't add nebulosity images the same way as continuum sources like a star using the same filter set. Nebulae don't emit light the same way.

Assuming the filter set passbands handle the O-III lines similarly to the human eye, I think you can. Against what objective standard you would balance emission nebulae colors?

For some filter sets, adding in O-III to green/blue helps.

Also, reflection nebulae like M45 are broadband sources, so in any case, there's little concern about them.


But that's impressive software if it is done automatically. I assume you take a series of calibration and target images, median filter them, calibrate, register, and coadd? What software do you use? I mean, what platform (IRAF, IDL)?

It's all automatic. What 17 herbs and spices does the Colonel use in his KFC? He'll never tell. 8)

MattCan you find the error in the original post above that is corrected here?

[01101001]

Can you find the error in the original post above that is corrected here?
"[/qoute]"

[nyx]

Ode to Slooh:

Betelgeuse is red, and Rigel blue.
Astronomy is great and wonderous too!
Comets, stars and nebula we view.
Every night online with the great awesome Slooh!!

[nyx]

Firstly, Jigsaw you are an idiot!
I have been online with slooh for several months and it is great! several times weekly we have great amateur astronomers like David Levy and astronomy magazine writers who comment live with the images on Slooh Radio,( http://www.slooh.com/radio.html ) and help us learn about astronomy. I also like when it is available to me in Nevada, I can view slooh in the day and then go out at night with my own scope!
Slooh is a great concept to help people who can't get out of thier house much and also to help new people learn about astronomy theres no-one stopping you from going outside too. there are 50 ten minute missions a night in group sessions and you can chat with other members and also you can get solo time on one of two telescopes. and for many months it's been free!
Perhaps you should try something out first before you open your big mouth and but your foot in it! It's ignorance and stupidity like yours that scares people from trying and learning new things.

[Ut]

Firstly, Jigsaw you are an idiot!
[...]
Perhaps you should try something out first before you open your big mouth and but your foot in it! It's ignorance and stupidity like yours that scares people from trying and learning new things.

Twice, eh? And double posting your, uh, ode.

FAQ (http://www.badastronomy.com/phpBB/faq.php)

[nyx]

sorry I will keep the Ode's down to a minimum. :P

[A Thousand Pardons]

I am impressed. We are hard pressed with our 0.46 m RC to get good color images so quickly. It might be nice if information on exposure times etc. was available in the site.
my account no longer works, I was never able to get it to be very accurate--the pointing and imaging seemed to be off.

[astrographer]

my account no longer works, I was never able to get it to be very accurate--the pointing and imaging seemed to be off.
SLOOH has been undergoing continuous improvement. There has been significant work done at the observatory, and the pointing has improved.

Matt
SLOOH Editor

[A Thousand Pardons]

Hey Matt, welcome back.

Only improved? :)