giving up ...

[gilmano]

I'll come back someday to see if we can see the errors done.
I hate to err and not knowing where or/and why.
I'd love to continue...

[G0Dfather]

click 'back' and look for the track! When you can't find it, post the movie in the forum. I'm sure that people can help you. So you can also prevent making errors.

[gilmano]

Thank you "GODfather" ... !

I don't remember seeing your kind of recommendation - click back, and watch what you didn't see - in the Stardust Team Help !

I think they need you ...

I'll try again, though I think, only 2 kinds of tracks shown in "Examples" provided by Stardust Team, makes people look for those 2 types, and if they don't show what else look for, only abnegates and ultra dedicated people will find something they don't know what it looks like.

Also, the little number of people searching for these so called tracks, is very little, most probably, because no one loves searching the unknown.

Stardust Team should pay attention and illustrate people what they should look for, and show if a new type of track comes out.

[Domelsmith]

Greetings: I had the same troubles gilmano had when starting--took me about 30 errors before I figured out to go back and re-look. Does anyone know how many professionals there are on The Team? I suspect us 18,000+ "dusters" outnumber them by a good margin.
I've looked at about 2000 films now, and have decided to tag anything that looks "different" or behaves "different" when I focus in and out. By doing this, I've racked up a fair number of "events" where only 3-8% of viewers saw what I saw. I figure this is a good compromise between "expecting the unexpected" and looking just for the few examples we get.
Happy Hunting.

[gilmano]

Thank you Domelsmith ...

I'll try your system. I've viewed 3000 real movies and I'm already with 123 errors.

Still think it is mandatory Sartdust Team to maintain a list of every kind of track discovered up to the moment to enhance the search.

I see that you do this work, not for money nor for the "glory" of it, and you and none of the others should be forced to rediscover the "wheel" every other day - loosing time and patience - on something that is already known by Stardust Team.

It is a waste of time and efficiency. Probably many give up frustated by the lack of support

Also, sometimes I see an appointed error or non-error without doing anything and of course I can not identify what is the correspondent movie.

My thanks for your help :

[the moon]

Still think it is mandatory for the Stardust Team to maintain a list of every kind of track discovered up to the moment to enhance the search.

Not quite sure what you mean. They have not found any tracks in the collector yet. The tracks in the test movies were made in a particle accelerator on earth to simulate what the real tracks made in space will probably look like.

There really isn't a wide range of things that we're looking for. The real tracks will look very similiar to the test movies. The only difference may be the size. Sure you can click on the larger horizontal tracks too. They might have particles that are interesting to study for other reasons, but the primary objective of this project is to find instellar dust which does not create those kinds of tracks.

[gilmano]

Thanks "the moon"

In "Examples" of what you will probably will see in the movies, there only 2 examples of tracks

And what I was expecting from Stardust Team is to include in "Examples" every kind of new aspect of track

Somehow I improved the search and I think you are right when you say that there are few kinds of possible tracks. You are right when you point out that, how large they are, is probably the most important

I err much less now.
Handy to know about the movies