The second one is already AI enhanced through a deconvolution plug-in in Pixinsight. This tool doesn’t magically create any details, all the details are real. It only brings out the subtle details so we can better see them. I would never apply an AI art script to any of my images

Also, resolution has been quadrupled through an algorithm called Drizzle.

Orion Nebula. It’s located in the Orion constellation and has a diameter of about 24 light years.

Thanks :)

I’ve found posting on r/space much less fun than posting my images to r/astronomy. I guess bigger subreddit = more people = more self declared experts (like the user who left a comment saying they „did some color grading for me“. Got a good laugh out of this one though)

Compressed beyond recognition. Thanks 🤦

I did that too for a long time. A bahtinov mask will make your life a lot easier. (if you don’t already have one)

Every clear night I get

Don’t know if this is serious or not. But just in case, the nebula didn’t get closer.

2,5h on the first one and 7h on the second one

Around a year, but the images were taken only a few months apart

u/Line—— has a point. The color is closer to what it’d really look like and there are more details and faint nebulosity visible in the second image of the wizard nebula.

Note to self: Don’t post to r/space anymore

This was from Bortle 7.

That’s the Orion Nebula (right) and the running man nebula (left)

I have my setup in another comment, but as far as location goes, I only take these images from home under Bortle 7 skies

Doesn’t the second one look way better than the first one to you?

Trevor takes some good images but he also has darker skies than mine. Plus if you have a full res image of his and try to zoom in, you’ll realize that his images aren’t that good.

He’s very focused on social media and his images are meant to fit that. So his images look good on Instagram, but wouldn’t have success on Astrobin. Any astrophotographer will be able to tell but I guess if you have no idea how these images are actually taken then it’s a lost cause.

Edit because I didn’t see: yes my mount was expensive but the mount is the single most important piece of equipment in AP. My mount isn’t even that exotic if you’d know other astronophotographers.

I would like to prove you wrong.

Astrophotography is pretty mich about skill. A beginner can take a crappy image with a the same setup that an advanced astrophotographer can take a great image with.

Because a lot of it comes down to image processing and acquisition techniques. But like 90% of it is image processing. I don’t know if you have experience in AP but processing is really hard to get right. I read three books about it and watched countless yt videos. Still I feel like I have a lot to learn

Of course the more you spend, the more you’re going to get out of your gear. It’s like that in almost every hobby. But even with modest/bad gear, you’ll get awesome results if you excel at processing. And your images will be terrible if you suck at processing. Also you’ll have to learn how to max out the performance you’ll get from the gear you bought.

I will share an example, where I processed the same data, taken with the same gear, around 5 months apart.

Some people, like Trevor Jones, have much much better gear than me but I still continue to produce better images than them. As I said, it all comes down to processing and making it the most out of the data you’ve got.

But of course, the more money you’ll spend on AP, the more you’ll get out of your investment. I only have a 6“ scope under severely light polluted skies. But if I had a 1m scope under Chile quality skies, it’d be a different story. The data would improve but on the other side: if I do better processing than them, I’m still going to produce better images than them.

Edit: link https://www.reddit.com/r/astrophotography/comments/y6ifra/processing_makes_a_world_of_difference_this_is/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3

Keep on doing it! It’ll pay off eventually, even if you’re not completely satisfied with your first results.

Same camera in both pics: Canon 60d (Ha modded)

But other than that, not many similarities in terms of gear.

First image was taken with a 70-200mm canon zoom lens, iOptron skyguider pro on an Amazon tripod and intervalometer.

Second one was taken with a Skywatcher 150P, EQ6R pro, optolong l-enhance, 72ED plus 120mm mini for guiding.