submitted 3 months ago by Disgrace6412@lemmy.world to c/astrophotography@lemmy.world

8 comments fedilink hide all child comments

~600 images with 4 seconds exposure without a tracker. This is my first ever (successful) try of any object on the night sky. I did a post a few weeks ago asking for a camera setup, and I went and bought a panasonic lumix g85 with the 45-150 f4-5.6 lens I had in mind before that. I know this is not the ideal setup, but I am still very proud of that image. Although I would appreciate any feedback on how to improve my skills.

top 8 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] bistdunarrisch@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago

For untracked this looks not too bad. To improve I would do the following:

in Siril: remove green noise, then photometric colour calibration
reduce exposure length to 1s
work on background extraction (maybe try GraXpert)
if you are not already doing: take calibration frames, especially flats

Are you interested in sharing the raw stacked file? I use a (paid) deconvolution tool called BlurXterminator and I wonder if it can handle such extreme star shapes. If it works I will of course send you the file.

[-] Disgrace6412@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Thanks for the feedback. You can try it with your software. Here is the file: https://drive.proton.me/urls/M8309JQDYR#rc9F6A9RYyCk

But I read some negatives online about how it uses hubble images to calibrate images. Here is a forum post: https://forum.astronomie.de/threads/blurxterminator-nein-danke.336225/ It is in german, but I'm sure you will understand it. Let me know what you think

Edit: Since the software is probably trained on images from better telescopes/observatories it is most likely using their images to calibrate mine. I have no direct problem with that, but I wouldn't consider this to be my own anymore. Personally I don't like using AI to enhance or fix some of my stuff.

But I'd still like to see the results if it works.

[-] bistdunarrisch@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Thanks for sharing! The software worked better than expected on your image!

On my research before purchasing the program I also stumbled over your linked forum post. However I found it very misleading, as the software does not generate details learned from other images but only works with data already in your image. As it is a deconvolution tool results can deviate slightly from the true nature. But that has little to do with AI being used here. I needed a whole semester at university to truly understand the maths behind it. My biggest problem is that the software isn't open source so one can't look into all the details. But there are already people working on open alternatives.

But this already is a very specific problem, don't forget that the biggest difference for good quality makes the data itself. I wish best of luck on your journey!

Oh and I forgot to mention that one other advice I would give is to search the darkest location to shoot from that you can access. Lightpollutionmap really helps with finding such places.

Edit: unstreched file with only background extraction and deconvolution: https://drive.proton.me/urls/QD4870ZMF4#uyVBYxKgWxgb

[-] Disgrace6412@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

This looks amazing. Thanks. And thanks for the advice. I’ll try it sometime. With the software I have the same problems as you do. I‘d also prefer it if it would be open source. And I don‘t own it, so I couldn’t confirm or deny anything from the forum. Sorry

[-] Balthazar@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Those star trails look longer than you would get from 4 second exposures, so I suspect you could do even better with more careful processing. Good start, though!

[-] Disgrace6412@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

But the star trails are similar sized in the raw files. I used Siril to stack and had to set the roundness value to around 0.3 for it to register the stars. I saw a yputube fix for that. The guy also set the Relax PSF thing to true, maybe this made them not perfectly aligned?

[-] Balthazar@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

Then it's a problem with how you're taking the images. Maybe the system is physically moving when you take the image?

[-] eran_morad@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago

Big up. I’ve been thinking about getting a camera and tracking mount just to photograph Andromeda.

this post was submitted on 22 Sep 2024

80 points (100.0% liked)

Astrophotography

1843 readers

1 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.
See this page for more details

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 2 years ago

MODERATORS

bigborpa@lemmy.world

lefty7283@lemmy.world