Taken with Vespera 2 smart scope. 272 stacked images over 45 minutes (10 seconds per image).
This is one of my first shots and I think it came out great for having very little idea of what I'm doing. The scope does all the work and processing.
this post was submitted on 16 Jun 2024
43 points (97.8% liked)
Astrophotography
1703 readers
3 users here now
Welcome to !astrophotography!
We are Lemmy's dedicated astrophotography community!
If you want to see or post pictures of space taken by amateurs using amateur level equipment, this is the place for you!
If you want to learn more about taking astro photos, check out our wiki or our discord!
Please read the rules before you post! It is your responsibility to be aware of current rules. Failure to be aware of current rules may result in your post being removed without warning at moderator discretion.
Rules
- I | Real space images only.
-
Astrophotography refers to images of astronomical objects or phenomena exclusively.
-
~~Images that show objects or people below the Kármán Line (100km) will be removed.~~ We won't be enforcing this rule for now, but as the community grows eventually we will split and have a separate space for just landscape astro.
-
Images must be an accurate representation of a real astronomical object.
- II | Original and Amateur Content Only
-
Image posts can only be images that you have captured and processed yourself, or discussion about capturing and/or processing your own images.
-
Images acquired from public sources, professional observatories, or other professional services are not allowed.
-
If you have done a drastic alteration or reprocessing of a prior submission, you may repost your edit - but only after a minimum of one week has passed.
- III | Post Types
-
Image posts are to link directly to the image, not to landing pages, personal galleries, blogs, or professional sites. Link to these in the comments. (AstroBin and Imgur, are allowed)
-
Questions are welcome here for the time being.
-
Links to blogs, articles or external websites should be interesting and promote discussion about amateur astrophotography.
- IV | Titles
- All image posts should just include include the name of the object being photographed. Extra info such as equipment, it being your first image, or other information should go in a comment along with your acquisition info. Please see this page for more details.
If your post is removed, try reposting with a different title. Don't hesitate to message the mods if you still have questions!
- V | Acquisition and Processing Information
-
All submitted images must include acquisition and processing details as a top-level comment. All posts without this information may be given a warning, and if not updated will be removed.
-
This includes the telescope, mount, camera, accessories, and any other pieces of equipment you used to capture the image.
-
You must also include processing details, i.e. the programs you used and a general rundown of the workflow/processes you used within those programs. “Processed in Photoshop” is not enough.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Well, I read the rule and the example of "Processed in Photoshop" being insufficient makes good sense for a community. I feel I'm a bit of a poser, I'm using a mid tier smart scope and a phone app that controls it, and the scope basically does all the work. I told it what to look at and for how long, it takes one astrometric measurement when it initialized to know exactly where it is, and built in servos did all the tracking. I ate some Hot Fries and did zero math or adjustments. I hope this isn't a cardinal sin, here.
Yeah if the smart scope is just doing all the work and spitting out an image on its own that’s fine. Generally as long as you include any kind of info about your processing steps it’s fine, and you can have it be as brief or detailed as you want (I know mine are on the longer side).
Personally I’m all for more detail = better. It’s a lot easier for people to give constructive criticism, and a good enough writeup can serve as a guide for those just learning how to process (and I’m always going back to my old posts just to remember how the hell I even processed a tricky image)