c/astronomy-photos

Stacking 200 frames used to take me all night, now it's 15 minutes with the new software

I used to think manual stacking was the only honest way. Spent two years doing it frame by frame in Photoshop. Then I tried Siril last month on a whim. The background extraction alone saved me an hour on a single shot of the Orion Nebula. I still do final tweaks by hand, but the grunt work is gone. Anyone else switch over and feel like they were wasting time before?

2 comments

lee.cora•3d ago

Stacking 200 frames used to take me all night, now it's 15 minutes with the new software

Back in 2018 I was manually aligning each frame in DeepSkyStacker on my old laptop in Boise and it took 3 hours for one nebula, but now with the AI alignment in the latest version I just drop in the folder and grab a coffee, has anyone else's processing routine changed that drastically since they switched?

2 comments

rivera.hannah•4d ago

Noticed a huge color shift in my moon shots over 8 months, any ideas why?

I've been photographing the moon from my backyard in Tucson since February, same telescope and same camera settings every time. Last week I put my August and April images side by side and the moon looks noticeably more yellow-orange now compared to the cooler gray-blue tones I got in spring. I checked my white balance and it hasn't budged, so that's not it. Could this be from dust in the atmosphere after the summer monsoon storms we had, or maybe the lower angle of the moon this time of year? I've also read that wildfire smoke can scatter light, but we didn't have any major fires near us. Has anyone else seen this seasonal color drift in their lunar photos, and what did you do to fix it?

2 comments

quinn341•5d ago

Question about a nebula photo I took 2 years apart

I was going through old files and found a shot of the Orion Nebula I took in 2022 with my old DSLR and a 200mm lens. Then I compared it to one I took last week with a dedicated astro cam and a small refractor. The difference is crazy. Same target, same exposure time around 90 minutes total, but the new one shows way more of the faint outer dust. Did anyone else see a big jump when they switched from a camera lens to a telescope? Was it just the gear or did I learn better processing too?

2 comments

the_robin•6d ago

PSA: don't try to photograph a lunar eclipse without testing your mount first

I drove out to Joshua Tree last month with my new rig, set up everything for the eclipse, and then my tripod head seized up completely at 2am because the grease had hardened in the cold. By the time I tried to fix it, I missed the best part of the totality phase and only got blurry shots of the last partial stage. Anyone else ever had gear fail at the worst possible moment during a shoot?

2 comments

troyc17•6d ago

My telescope mount took 45 minutes to find the moon last week

I got a new computerized mount for my birthday, set it up in my backyard in Phoenix, and it took 45 minutes to even find the moon. The alignment process kept failing because my neighbor's palm tree was blocking half the sky. Turns out I had the time zone set to UTC instead of Arizona time, which is just embarrassing. Has anyone else had their mount get confused by a single tree?

2 comments

sethm58•7d ago

Observed a clear night sky from a gravel pit outside Missoula last month

I was out installing a fence near a gravel pit outside Missoula. Finished later than expected, around 9 PM. Looked up and saw the Milky Way so clear it felt fake. No city lights for miles. I've looked at astronomy photos online for years but seeing it with your own eyes hits different. Made me wonder how many people have never actually seen the real thing. Anyone else have a spot where the sky just blows you away?

3 comments

garcia.wren•11d ago

Warning: That viral photo of the Andromeda galaxy might not be real colors

I saw this amazing shot of Andromeda on Instagram and commented about how beautiful the pink and blue gas clouds were. Then someone replied saying those colors are totally fake, just artistic interpretation. I looked into it and apparently most deep sky photos use filters that assign colors to specific gases, like sulfur gets mapped to red even though it's actually a different wavelength. It really surprised me because I always thought those Hubble shots were accurate to what you'd see if you flew out there. But then again, isn't the whole point of astrophotography to make the invisible visible? Some people say false color is misleading for beginners, while others argue it's the only way to show details our eyes can't see. Where do you draw the line between artistic license and scientific accuracy in a photo?

2 comments

kellyallen•12d ago

That one guy at a star party who argued about Jupiter's moons

I was at a public viewing night at the Griffith Observatory in LA last spring, just showing people the rings of Saturn through my 8-inch dobsonian. This one older fellow in a Hawaiian shirt kept insisting that what I was pointing out as Io was actually Europa, and he started quoting some blog he read from 2018... I just handed him the eyepiece and let him look for himself, and he finally went quiet. Has anyone else had to politely deal with someone who was totally wrong but very confident at a star party?

2 comments

the_olivia•13d ago

After 3 years of trying, I finally got a sharp photo of the Orion Nebula with just a DSLR and tripod

I kept seeing these amazing photos of M42 online with telescopes and fancy mounts, and I figured there was no way I could get anything decent with my old Canon T3i and a 200mm lens. But last month, I decided to actually try stacking like 300 photos in DeepSkyStacker instead of just taking one long exposure. It took me about 4 hours of messing around with the settings and watching YouTube tutorials at 2am before I realized I had to take shorter subs because of star trailing. The processing part was a whole other nightmare where I spent like 45 minutes just figuring out how to stretch the histogram without blowing out the core. When I finally got that first processed image where you could actually see the nebula shape, I nearly woke up my whole apartment building. Has anyone else spent way too long trying to get a good deep sky shot with just a cheap lens?

2 comments

henry_anderson54•14d ago

That time an astro-photographer told me to ditch my DSLR for a dedicated camera

He kept pushing a ZWO ASI and said my old Canon would never capture nebula detail, and I fought him on it for months. Finally borrowed one from a club member and yeah, the difference in Ha data is night and day. Anyone else stubbornly stick with gear way longer than you should have?

3 comments

michael803•19d ago

Got sick of blurry star photos until I checked my tripod feet

Everyone keeps blaming their camera or lens for soft stars but I bet 9 out of 10 times it's because one tripod leg is sitting on a rock or uneven ground. Took me three nights at a dark site to realize my cheap tripod had a loose foot plate that was wobbling at every shutter click.

3 comments

kellyallen•19d ago

Which telescope setup gave better deep sky photos: a cheap refractor with a flimsy mount or a used Dobsonian with a phone adapter?

I spent last summer comparing two approaches for photographing galaxies and nebulas. First I tried a $200 refractor on a lightweight tripod mount and got wobbly, blurry shots of Andromeda every time. Then I picked up a used 8-inch Dobsonian for $300 and just held my phone up to the eyepiece with a cheap adapter. The Dobsonian shots were way sharper even from my light polluted yard in Phoenix. Has anyone else found that a solid mount matters more than the telescope itself for getting decent photos?

3 comments

gracej99•22d ago

Talked to an astrophotographer in Boulder who changed how I see star colors

I was at a meetup last weekend and this guy named Mike showed me his photo of Orion. He pointed out that Betelgeuse isn't just a red dot, it's actually a deep ruby color when you stretch the data right. I always thought star colors were just a filter thing, but he explained it's real hydrogen alpha and oxygen emissions. Has anyone else noticed how different stars look once you learn to process the colors properly?

2 comments

rivera.hannah•24d ago

The night the moon looked fake through my 8 inch Dobsonian

Had one perfect night last Thursday where the sky was dead clear and the air was still. I pulled out my old scope and Saturn's rings were so sharp I could see the Cassini Division without straining. Anyone else have those nights where you just sit there staring for way longer than you planned?

3 comments

garcia.cameron•1mo ago

Vent: That person in the comments who told me my moon photo was overprocessed

Some random said my stacked moon image looked like a glazed donut and after comparing it to a raw single frame I realized they were right, so now I keep my sharpening slider below 30 and my saturation under 15, has anyone else had a random comment actually fix their editing?

3 comments

johnson.eva•1mo ago

Overheard a guy at a star party say old film astrophotography had more soul than digital

He was showing a print from a 1986 shot of the Whirlpool Galaxy on a 6-inch Newtonian, and the faint halos around the stars really did have this dreamy quality I haven't seen in a stack of 200 digital subs, so has anyone else noticed a shift in how todays photos feel compared to those older ones?

4 comments

lucashenderson•1mo ago

Bought a $40 telescope filter off eBay that was just blue cellophane

I was trying to photograph Jupiter last month and thought I’d save a few bucks on a “planetary filter.” When it showed up, it was literally a piece of blue plastic wrapped in cardboard. I stuck it on the eyepiece and got a blurry blue blob. Lost $40 and an hour of clear sky. Has anyone else gotten burned by cheap astro gear?

3 comments

shanes66•1mo ago

The Andromeda galaxy photo I took last week has a faint satellite trail through it - had no idea how common these are

Was processing my stack from Tuesday night. Saw this thin white line cutting across M31. Thought it was a sensor artifact. Nope. Looked it up - there's over 9,000 satellites in orbit now. Makes me wonder how many of my older shots have junk in them. Anyone else dealing with this?

3 comments

torres.riley•1mo ago

Stacking programs felt like a waste until I tried Siril on a whim

I spent years using Photoshop for stacking and never understood why my nebula shots looked so noisy, then I followed a Siril tutorial from a guy on YouTube and the difference in just one 20 minute session was huge. Has anyone else had better luck with free software after ditching the expensive stuff?

3 comments

robin896•1mo ago

That old astrophotographer told me to skip the expensive filter and I'm glad I listened

Met this guy at a star party in Arizona a few years back. He had this beat up telescope and was pulling in way better detail on the Orion Nebula than I was with my fancy setup. He said 'stop buying stuff for the scope and learn to stack your subs properly first.' I ignored him for like two years until I finally sat down and really learned DeepSkyStacker. My photos improved more in one weekend than all the gear upgrades I'd done before. Has anyone else had someone give advice that went against the usual forum wisdom and it actually worked?

3 comments

river_thompson•1mo ago

Overheard a guy at the coffee shop say nebula photos are just 'colored gas'

I was grabbing a late night espresso before my shift and this dude at the next table was telling his friend that all those Hubble shots are fake, just colored gas clouds. Made me think how many people don't know about the ionized hydrogen and sulfur filters we use to pull out those specific wavelengths (like H-alpha). Has anyone else run into this kind of dismissal of astrophotography as 'not real'?

3 comments

troyc17•1mo ago

Swapped a 6-inch telescope for a cheap DSLR after seeing the Orion Nebula shot from my buddy's setup

I always thought astrophotography needed expensive gear until I borrowed his old Canon and got a decent shot of the Milky Way from my backyard in just two tries, anyone else ditch their eyepiece for a camera sensor?

3 comments

fionat55•1mo ago

That $300 telescope filter I bought was a total waste of money

I got talked into buying a fancy light pollution filter for my telescope last month. Cost me $300 at a local shop in Denver. The guy said it would make city sky photos look like they were from a dark site. But all my shots came out with weird color casts and I couldn't fix them in editing. Has anyone else had bad luck with those expensive filters, or did I just pick the wrong brand?

3 comments

faithpatel•1mo ago

Used to stack all my astro photos in GIMP layer by layer... so much wasted time

I spent like 2 hours manually aligning 30 frames of the Orion Nebula back in 2019. Now I just run everything through DeepSkyStacker and get better results in 10 minutes... has anyone else stuck with an old tool way too long before switching?

3 comments