this post was submitted on 19 Aug 2024
167 points (99.4% liked)
Astrophotography
1787 readers
4 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.
- 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I made this comparison a while ago, and figured I'd share it since I've seen some headlines going around the last couple days...
The Moon's orbit isn't a perfect circle, and at times is a little closer and a little farther away from Earth. It's called a supermoon when the moon is full and at its closest point, and a micromoon when its full and at its furthest point
I wanted to make this comparison to highlight that the supermoon isn't really that much larger than normal. Personally I think the supermoon is overhyped for what it is, and that it's hard to tell visually that the moon is larger or smaller, unless you do a direct comparison like this. The moon can appear larger than normal when its close to the horizon, but the actual size of it is no different than if it was straight overhead: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon_illusion
The angular diameters and distances were taken from a planetarium program called Stellarium. I compared the pixel measurements of my photos to the values calculated by Stellarium, and the discrepancy was only 0.22%.
Equipment:
TPO 6" F/4 Imaging Newtonian
ZWO ASI1600MM-Pro
Skywatcher Quattro Coma Corrector
ZWO EFW 8x1.25"/31mm
Astronomik LRGB+CLS Filters- 31mm
Moonlite Autofocuser
Acquisition: (Camera at Unity Gain, -20°C for supermoon, -10°C for micromoon)
Astronomik Red filter used to combat atmospheric seeing
Exposure- 0.213ms for supermoon, 1.115ms for micromoon
1000 frame capture for supermoon
2000 frame capture for micromoon
Capture Software:
Processing:
Supermoon: Best 10% of frames stacked in Autostakkert!3
Micromoon: Best 25% of frames stacked
Registax Wavelets for sharpening on both images
Level and curve adjustments in Photoshop
Images combined and annotated in Photoshop
This is comparing the extremes of the size difference, too. It's closer to only a 5% difference when comparing an average full moon to a supermoon.
5% or 10% bigger is a lot more than nothing. I'm more surprised that the difference is so much when saying it's overhyped.
An 11% increase of something small is miniscule.
The actual apparent size difference between the minimum and maximum size of the moon is 1/15th of a single degree in the night sky.
And yet a 10% increase in the moons actual circumference would be a change of more than 1,000km.
Idk it's a well known illusion that the moon can appear or "feel" bigger than it actually is when measured. Planetariums apparently project it larger (1degree instead of 0.5) in order to seem appropriate.
All that "science" every one knows, the moon is simply binging and purging!