Loading…
13
A guy at the Tucson star party said my deep space shots were 'too colorful'
He argued real astronomy photos should only show natural color, but I think processing brings out details you'd never see otherwise. What's your take on editing for artistic effect versus strict scientific accuracy?
3 comments
Log in to join the discussion
Log In3 Comments
faith_thomas6mo ago
Oh man, the "real astronomy photos" line gets me. My first attempts looked like gray smudges on a black smudge, so I'm all for some color. If we only showed what the eye sees, most of us would just post black pictures. Isn't the whole point to share the wonder?
2
ericj456mo ago
Actually, the eye can see color in some bright nebulae through big scopes, like the Orion Nebula's green hints. But you're right that most deep space objects are too faint for our color vision. The real question is what you're trying to show. A scientist mapping gas clouds needs different data than someone sharing the beauty of the cosmos. Why not do both?
2
nina_campbell6mo ago
Totally agree that purpose changes everything. When I process my own astrophotos, I keep two folders: one for science where I just stretch the data to show structure, and another where I add color to make it look like what I felt seeing it. The gray smudge version never gets the same reaction from friends and family. What processing steps do you usually take for your public shares?
9