c/astronomy-photos

Someone told me my star trails were too short and it actually helped a lot

PSA: My $80 star tracker vs a solid tripod and intervalometer

The tracker gave me star trails at 30 seconds, but stacking 200 untracked shots from my old tripod in DeepSkyStacker gave me a cleaner Orion Nebula. Anyone have a budget tracker that actually works under $150?

I think the obsession with super long exposures on deep sky objects is overrated

I set up my tracker for a 5-hour session on the Orion Nebula, and honestly, the final stack looked muddy compared to a cleaner 45-minute one I did last month. I learned that more integration time isn't always better if your seeing conditions aren't perfect. Has anyone else found a sweet spot for exposure length before the returns diminish?

Tried stacking with and without a light pollution filter from my backyard in Phoenix

Last week I shot the Orion Nebula with my 8-inch scope. I took 30 lights without a filter, then another 30 with a cheap CLS clip-in filter. The unfiltered stack was a washed-out orange mess. The filtered one actually showed some dark dust lanes and the core color. The difference was night and day, literally. Anyone have a favorite filter for heavy city glow?

I heard a guy at the star party say 'processing is cheating' and it got me thinking

I was at the star party out at the Cherry Springs dark sky park last month, and this older guy was showing off his film shots of the Milky Way. Someone asked about stacking and noise reduction, and he just said, 'Real astronomy photos come straight from the camera. All that processing is just cheating.' It stuck with me because my own shots of the Orion Nebula are a mess without at least some basic levels adjustment in a free program like Siril. I get wanting to keep things pure, but modern sensors pick up so much data that you almost have to process it to see what's really there, right? On the other hand, maybe there's a line where you turn a real object into digital art. Where do you all draw that line for your own photos?

My attempt at a long exposure of the Milky Way from my backyard last month ended with a raccoon in the shot

I set everything up for a 30-second exposure, and when I checked the screen, there was just a blurry trash panda staring right at the lens. Anyone else have wildlife photobomb their astro shots?

My first attempt at the Orion Nebula got ruined by a neighbor's floodlight

I was set up in my backyard in Phoenix last month, had the camera tracking for a solid hour, and then their new security light came on and washed out the whole frame. I ended up having to pack up and drive 40 minutes out of town to a darker spot to start over. What's the most unexpected thing that has ever ruined a shot for you guys?

Spent 3 whole nights trying to get a clear shot of the Orion Nebula, my mount was the problem the whole time!

I was at the Griffith Observatory last night and the light pollution was so bad I couldn't see the Milky Way.

It made me realize my backyard shots are pointless without a proper filter. Anyone know a good one under $100?

I finally got the Orion Nebula to look right after I stopped stacking 50 frames and just shot 15 good ones

Vent: I used to think stacking 10 frames was enough for a decent deep sky shot

After a clear night in Tucson last month, I tried stacking 50 and the noise reduction was like night and day. Has anyone else found a specific number where the quality really jumps?

Hot take: The new observatory in Flagstaff is a huge letdown for astrophotography

I drove out to the Lowell Discovery Channel Telescope last weekend, expecting dark skies and clear views. The light pollution from the nearby town has gotten so bad you can barely see the Milky Way with your own eyes. I tried to get a 30 second exposure of the Orion Nebula and the whole frame was washed out in orange. They built a world class scope there but forgot to protect the night sky around it. Has anyone else tried shooting there recently and found a way to work around the glow?

Just wasted $75 on a 'premium' light pollution filter that made my Andromeda shot look worse

It added a weird green tint and killed all the faint dust details, basically ruining a whole night's imaging. Anyone found a filter that actually works from a suburban backyard?

Honestly, my first try at the Orion Nebula from my backyard in Tucson was a total disaster. Forgot to check the dew point.

My uncle said to always shoot the moon with a low ISO, and he was totally wrong

He insisted 100 ISO was the only way to avoid grain, but my shots were always blurry from the long exposure. I tried 800 ISO with my DSLR last month and finally got a sharp, detailed crater shot. What's the highest ISO you've used successfully for planetary shots?

I was sure that 'green flash' at sunset was a camera trick, but I saw it clear as day off the coast of Oregon last week.

I finally caught it with my own eyes after a hundred failed photos, just a pure green spark right as the sun vanished. Anyone know the best camera settings to actually capture that moment?

Why does nobody talk about the cheap tripod trap for astrophotography?

I dropped $80 on a flimsy aluminum one that shook in a light breeze, ruining a whole night of trying to capture the Orion Nebula. Anyone have a solid budget option that actually holds still?

Remember when we had to wait a week for film to get developed from the observatory?

I just compared a print from 2003 of the Orion Nebula to the stacked image I pulled off my backyard camera last night. The difference in clarity is just wild, isn't it?

Showerthought: I picked a 4-inch refractor over an 8-inch Dob for deep sky and I'm happy

Everyone in my club near Phoenix said I needed a big Dobsonian to see galaxies, but I went with a small refractor for its sharp, wide views and easy setup. After six months, I've logged over 40 objects from my backyard, and the crisp star fields beat a fuzzy blob in a bigger scope. Has anyone else gone against the 'aperture is everything' rule for visual observing?

Ngl, I used a cheap Amazon webcam as a planetary camera for Jupiter and it actually worked

My shot of the Orion Nebula from 2022 looks like a gray blob now.

Took it with my old DSLR and a basic lens from my backyard in Phoenix. Just got a small telescope and a proper filter this January. The new photo shows pink gas and that faint blue haze around the stars. What's the one upgrade that made the biggest difference for your deep sky shots?

I always stacked my star photos to fight noise, but one clear night in Sedona changed my mind

Last week I was out at the airport overlook near Sedona, Arizona, and decided to just take a single 30-second shot of the Milky Way with my old camera. I figured it would be a grainy mess. When I got home and looked, the detail in that one frame was actually cleaner than my usual 20-image stacks. I think the super dry air and zero moon made the difference. Anyone else get a surprisingly good single exposure?

Finally got a decent shot of the Orion Nebula after 5 attempts, and my processing stack just clicked.

Seeing the faint dust lanes appear for the first time on my laptop screen after a 2-hour session with 90-second exposures felt like a real breakthrough, so what was your first 'aha' moment with deep-sky editing?

Heads up: The light pollution over my backyard in Phoenix got way worse in just 6 months. Check your own sky.

My brother said my deep space shots are missing the point

He came over last weekend and saw my latest Andromeda photo, a 10-hour stack from my backyard in Tucson. He said, 'It's a nice picture of data, but where's the awe?' He argued that chasing perfect noise reduction and pinpoint stars has made my images feel sterile, like lab results. That hit different because he's right. I've spent so much time on the technical side that the raw wonder of the object itself got lost. Has anyone else felt their focus on processing has taken the magic out of the hobby?