Starship Asterisk*

illexsquid wrote: ↑Mon Feb 01, 2021 7:57 pm

Chris Peterson wrote: ↑Mon Feb 01, 2021 5:21 pm

illexsquid wrote: ↑Mon Feb 01, 2021 4:36 pm

Chris, you're being pretty disingenuous here. As an experienced astrophotographer, you know the difference between stacking and composition. And while both can be used to create a pretty image, the former is used to bring out underlying details in the real object, and the latter is used to create clickbait-y eye candy. The cut-and-paste compositions bear more relationship to art than to the objective reality,

For the record, this APOD image is not such a composition; the creator put considerable effort and talent into making it represent reality as closely as possible, and documented the process above. However, the problem is that it could be a composition of two unrelated images, and we'd never know. Certainly I've seen daytime land images with night sky views thrown in that are not possible from the same location, so I know that it happens.

If you derive happiness from making those impossible cut-and-pastes, then more power to you. Just don't try to misrepresent them as any kind of reality. I find enough wonder in the universe we actually live in.

If it is a composition that can in no way be distinguished from reality, does it matter?

Well, obviously you have to decide that for yourself. As for me, I find such composites distasteful for several reasons. For one, they cheapen the value of the shots of people who actually put the work in to create something more realistic (like the photographer behind this APOD). Also, "can no way be distinguished from reality" means different things to different people; for the astronomically literate people in this forum, that's a very high standard. These compositions can create an expectation among the less well-informed that can lead to disillusionment when they discover they're not "the truth". (And yes, I know that's a problem with all astrophotography, but explanations like "this is a long exposure" or "this is a particular wavelength filter showing certain elements" are better than "I cut and pasted a beach in Tahiti because it was pretty".)

Chris Peterson wrote: ↑Mon Feb 01, 2021 5:21 pm

illexsquid wrote: ↑Mon Feb 01, 2021 4:36 pm

Chris Peterson wrote: ↑Sat Jan 30, 2021 12:51 am

You're not going to run into many astroimages that are not "composites". Indeed, your average phone camera constructs its images from processed stacks of separate images shot at different times and different exposures. How is that any different?

Chris, you're being pretty disingenuous here. As an experienced astrophotographer, you know the difference between stacking and composition. And while both can be used to create a pretty image, the former is used to bring out underlying details in the real object, and the latter is used to create clickbait-y eye candy. The cut-and-paste compositions bear more relationship to art than to the objective reality,

For the record, this APOD image is not such a composition; the creator put considerable effort and talent into making it represent reality as closely as possible, and documented the process above. However, the problem is that it could be a composition of two unrelated images, and we'd never know. Certainly I've seen daytime land images with night sky views thrown in that are not possible from the same location, so I know that it happens.

If you derive happiness from making those impossible cut-and-pastes, then more power to you. Just don't try to misrepresent them as any kind of reality. I find enough wonder in the universe we actually live in.

If it is a composition that can in no way be distinguished from reality, does it matter?

illexsquid wrote: ↑Mon Feb 01, 2021 4:36 pm

Chris Peterson wrote: ↑Sat Jan 30, 2021 12:51 am

majoroz wrote: ↑Sat Jan 30, 2021 12:46 am

Agreed........

The are making waaaaay too many "composites" lately.

I get weary of their photoshopping..........

You're not going to run into many astroimages that are not "composites". Indeed, your average phone camera constructs its images from processed stacks of separate images shot at different times and different exposures. How is that any different?

Chris, you're being pretty disingenuous here. As an experienced astrophotographer, you know the difference between stacking and composition. And while both can be used to create a pretty image, the former is used to bring out underlying details in the real object, and the latter is used to create clickbait-y eye candy. The cut-and-paste compositions bear more relationship to art than to the objective reality,

For the record, this APOD image is not such a composition; the creator put considerable effort and talent into making it represent reality as closely as possible, and documented the process above. However, the problem is that it could be a composition of two unrelated images, and we'd never know. Certainly I've seen daytime land images with night sky views thrown in that are not possible from the same location, so I know that it happens.

If you derive happiness from making those impossible cut-and-pastes, then more power to you. Just don't try to misrepresent them as any kind of reality. I find enough wonder in the universe we actually live in.

Chris Peterson wrote: ↑Sat Jan 30, 2021 12:51 am

majoroz wrote: ↑Sat Jan 30, 2021 12:46 am

Holger Nielsen wrote: ↑Fri Jan 29, 2021 1:18 pm I like coffee. And I like tea. But I do not like them mixed together.

Agreed........

The are making waaaaay too many "composites" lately.

I get weary of their photoshopping..........

You're not going to run into many astroimages that are not "composites". Indeed, your average phone camera constructs its images from processed stacks of separate images shot at different times and different exposures. How is that any different?

johnnydeep wrote: ↑Fri Jan 29, 2021 6:45 pm

Ann wrote: ↑Fri Jan 29, 2021 3:44 pm

johnnydeep wrote: ↑Fri Jan 29, 2021 3:27 pm
Ok, I see North America clearly in the lighter nebula (NGC 7000), but where the heck is the pelican in IC 5070? Wikipedia shows this pic for IC 5070, but all I can see is maybe a ghost-like apparation:

North America Pelican 68 Cyg annotated.png

Here you are:

1 = North America Nebula, NGC 7000
2 = The Pelican Nebula
3 = 68 Cygni, one of the sky's rare naked eye O-type stars.

Ann

Thanks. A pretty sorry pelican if you ask me

majoroz wrote: ↑Sat Jan 30, 2021 12:46 am

Holger Nielsen wrote: ↑Fri Jan 29, 2021 1:18 pm I like coffee. And I like tea. But I do not like them mixed together.

Agreed........

The are making waaaaay too many "composites" lately.

I get weary of their photoshopping..........

Holger Nielsen wrote: ↑Fri Jan 29, 2021 1:18 pm I like coffee. And I like tea. But I do not like them mixed together.

bystander wrote: ↑Fri Jan 29, 2021 5:36 pm

illexsquid wrote: ↑Fri Jan 29, 2021 5:09 pm

Chris Peterson wrote: ↑Fri Jan 29, 2021 2:28 pm
While not something our eye can see, a shot like this reveals a reality that, nevertheless, exists.

I'm actually with Holger on this one. This is not a matter of enhancing details normally invisible to the eye. It's a matter of adding something that was NOT THERE. One can't track the sky without smudging the land; one can't get the moonlit peaks without both underexposing and washing out the deep sky. The solution? Just cut and paste two unrelated images! Might as well add a bemittened Bernie Sanders while you're at it.

144444146_2954315631455324_5366364864944009038_o[1].jpg

From the photographer on facebook:

Hi everyone! I'm the photographer. Firstly, thanks so much for so many kind comments, and to APOD for featuring my image! I wanted to provide a couple photos here to show that this indeed a real alignment, obviously taken using tracking for the sky, and no tracking for the foreground. Here is one single unstacked h-alpha exposure, showing the alignment. Please let me know if you have any questions!

Cousin Ricky wrote: ↑Fri Jan 29, 2021 10:05 pm

johnnydeep wrote: ↑Fri Jan 29, 2021 3:27 pm Ok, I see North America clearly in the lighter nebula (NGC 7000), but where the heck is the pelican in IC 5070?

This is what I see:

pelican-gertsman.jpg

illexsquid wrote: ↑Fri Jan 29, 2021 5:09 pm

XgeoX wrote: ↑Fri Jan 29, 2021 3:19 pm

Chris Peterson wrote: ↑Fri Jan 29, 2021 2:28 pm

While not something our eye can see, a shot like this reveals a reality that, nevertheless, exists.

Well said! Indeed, I feel people get too hung up on “what the eye would see” to enjoy all the different ways in the spectrum of energy to view objects. They are all valid yet many will call them “fake”
I especially love the composites where they combine Hubble shots with x-ray or gamma rays which let you see the relationship to what we see in visible light.

Eric

I'm actually with Holger on this one. This is not a matter of enhancing details normally invisible to the eye. It's a matter of adding something that was NOT THERE. One can't track the sky without smudging the land; one can't get the moonlit peaks without both underexposing and washing out the deep sky. The solution? Just cut and paste two unrelated images! Might as well add a bemittened Bernie Sanders while you're at it.

johnnydeep wrote: ↑Fri Jan 29, 2021 3:27 pm Ok, I see North America clearly in the lighter nebula (NGC 7000), but where the heck is the pelican in IC 5070?

illexsquid wrote: ↑Fri Jan 29, 2021 5:09 pm I'm actually with Holger on this one. This is not a matter of enhancing details normally invisible to the eye. It's a matter of adding something that was NOT THERE. One can't track the sky without smudging the land; one can't get the moonlit peaks without both underexposing and washing out the deep sky. The solution? Just cut and paste two unrelated images! Might as well add a bemittened Bernie Sanders while you're at it.

Ann wrote: ↑Fri Jan 29, 2021 3:44 pm

johnnydeep wrote: ↑Fri Jan 29, 2021 3:27 pm
Ok, I see North America clearly in the lighter nebula (NGC 7000), but where the heck is the pelican in IC 5070? Wikipedia shows this pic for IC 5070, but all I can see is maybe a ghost-like apparation:

North America Pelican 68 Cyg annotated.png

Here you are:

1 = North America Nebula, NGC 7000
2 = The Pelican Nebula
3 = 68 Cygni, one of the sky's rare naked eye O-type stars.

Ann

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mvmwqx5vjps wrote:

Gassy Jack

---

<<The statue of John Deighton, also known as "Gassy Jack", is installed in Vancouver's Gastown neighborhood, in British Columbia, Canada.It stands at the intersection of Carrall and Water streets. The statue was commissioned in 1970 by a group of Gastown developers. It is located near where Deighton had operated the Globe Saloon.

Deighton (November 1830 – May 23, 1875) was a Canadian bar owner who was born in Hull, England. He traveled to California and then New Caledonia (now British Columbia, Canada) as a gold prospector, before operating bars in New Westminster and later on the south side of Burrard Inlet. The area later became known as Gastown after him.

On June 16, 2020, the statue was splattered with red paint amidst growing calls to remove statues honoring colonialist or racist individuals. Activists cited Deighton's marriage to a 12 year old Squamish girl named Quahail-ya as the reason for its removal. A petition calling for its removal garnered over 1,500 signatures.>>

illexsquid wrote: ↑Fri Jan 29, 2021 5:09 pm

Chris Peterson wrote: ↑Fri Jan 29, 2021 2:28 pm

Holger Nielsen wrote: ↑Fri Jan 29, 2021 1:18 pm I like coffee. And I like tea. But I do not like them mixed together.

While not something our eye can see, a shot like this reveals a reality that, nevertheless, exists.

I'm actually with Holger on this one. This is not a matter of enhancing details normally invisible to the eye. It's a matter of adding something that was NOT THERE. One can't track the sky without smudging the land; one can't get the moonlit peaks without both underexposing and washing out the deep sky. The solution? Just cut and paste two unrelated images! Might as well add a bemittened Bernie Sanders while you're at it.

XgeoX wrote: ↑Fri Jan 29, 2021 3:19 pm

Chris Peterson wrote: ↑Fri Jan 29, 2021 2:28 pm

Holger Nielsen wrote: ↑Fri Jan 29, 2021 1:18 pm I like coffee. And I like tea. But I do not like them mixed together.

While not something our eye can see, a shot like this reveals a reality that, nevertheless, exists.

Well said! Indeed, I feel people get too hung up on “what the eye would see” to enjoy all the different ways in the spectrum of energy to view objects. They are all valid yet many will call them “fake”
I especially love the composites where they combine Hubble shots with x-ray or gamma rays which let you see the relationship to what we see in visible light.

Eric

johnnydeep wrote: ↑Fri Jan 29, 2021 3:27 pm

APOD Robot wrote: ↑Fri Jan 29, 2021 5:08 am North American Nightscape

Explanation: On January 21, light from the Moon near first quarter illuminated the foreground in this snowy mountain and night scene. Known as The Lions, the striking pair of mountain peaks are north of Vancouver, British Colombia, Canada, North America, planet Earth. Poised above the twin summits, left of Deneb alpha star of the constellation Cygnus, are emission regions NGC 7000 and IC 5070. Part of a large star forming complex about 1,500 light-years from Vancouver, they shine with the characteristic red glow of atomic hydrogen gas. Outlines of the bright emission regions suggest their popular names, The North America Nebula and The Pelican Nebula. The well-planned, deep nightscape is a composite of consecutive exposures made with a modified digital camera and telephoto lens. Foreground exposures were made with camera fixed to a tripod, background exposures were made tracking the sky. The result preserves sharp natural detail and reveals a range of brightness and color that your eye can't quite see on its own.

Ok, I see North America clearly in the lighter nebula (NGC 7000), but where the heck is the pelican in IC 5070? Wikipedia shows this pic for IC 5070, but all I can see is maybe a ghost-like apparation:

Click to view full size image

APOD Robot wrote: ↑Fri Jan 29, 2021 5:08 am North American Nightscape

Explanation: On January 21, light from the Moon near first quarter illuminated the foreground in this snowy mountain and night scene. Known as The Lions, the striking pair of mountain peaks are north of Vancouver, British Colombia, Canada, North America, planet Earth. Poised above the twin summits, left of Deneb alpha star of the constellation Cygnus, are emission regions NGC 7000 and IC 5070. Part of a large star forming complex about 1,500 light-years from Vancouver, they shine with the characteristic red glow of atomic hydrogen gas. Outlines of the bright emission regions suggest their popular names, The North America Nebula and The Pelican Nebula. The well-planned, deep nightscape is a composite of consecutive exposures made with a modified digital camera and telephoto lens. Foreground exposures were made with camera fixed to a tripod, background exposures were made tracking the sky. The result preserves sharp natural detail and reveals a range of brightness and color that your eye can't quite see on its own.

Chris Peterson wrote: ↑Fri Jan 29, 2021 2:28 pm

Holger Nielsen wrote: ↑Fri Jan 29, 2021 1:18 pm I like coffee. And I like tea. But I do not like them mixed together.

While not something our eye can see, a shot like this reveals a reality that, nevertheless, exists.

Holger Nielsen wrote: ↑Fri Jan 29, 2021 1:18 pm I like coffee. And I like tea. But I do not like them mixed together.