I am not a fan of the piece with the banana taped to a wall, but your comment reveals a lack of understanding of what art is. In astrophotography, the elements that make it art are the same as in any image, whether a painting or a photo: originality, composition, color, shape, etc. The technical side is the craft.
Great video. Love your composition ideas. As a photographer from the 60's on to retirement I think your ideas are excellent. Teaching how to use this for Astrophotography is phenomenal. I am at the point in my journey to start considering along with the technical stuff. 👍
The way I like to describe astrophotography is this way : the word "photography" comes from the ancient Greek words "photos" and "graphos", which translate to "writing with light". Astrophotography is then the art of writing (or drawing) with a very distant and ancient light. It's like drawing using very old ink or charcoal, or forging with meteorite iron, or photographing using past century silver plate. It's also incredibly humbling toward the source material once we think about it that way 🙂
wow i really i like that connection with tracing the word back to it's roots. particularly because astrophotography is so fundamentally different in which where the light comes from. all forms of photography use light that comes from the sun. photos in the day use light from the sun, if the photo is lit up by lights, it's more than likely the light was powered by an energy sourced traced back to the sun, even if you use the flash on your camera, your batteries would have gotten their power from an energy source traced back to the sun. however, with astrophotography you utilise the feint light of other stars to create an image. that's why i think this niche of photography is so unique :)
Fundamentals, or elements of art should be discussed more in astrophotography, because they’re just as important in every art form. Really super that you’re digging into this. It will help everyone to make better photos.
The better I get at processing the more I am able to take the photo and manipulate what I want in it. To pull out what detail I want. I dont think people realize how difficult astrophotography processing can be. It is an art to me
@@Aneliuse no, but I think people dont understand the process and think we point and click and bam beautiful photo. There are a lot of personal choices that come into play during processing that makes it an art
I'm really glad you're talking about this. Coming from a photographic background, paying attention to composition is second nature to me. It's not an esthetic that I see a lot of in astrophotography in general which is too bad. As you've pointed out, it's not about the gear or what software you use. It's all about the eye, taste and sensitivity that the photographer brings to the subject.
Finally, someone is talking about this. It's kind of like the elephant in the room. When you are able to get the correct date, composition is probably the most important factor in making a photo stand out.
Damn Nico, that image is badass. 100 hours. jeez it'd take me 2 years to get that. I'd love to see a deep dive in post processing on how you interrogated SHO and RGB. remember, it don't mean a thing unless you print it!
I would add another parameter: light filtering and compositing. Edit: I realized now that you mentioned this at the end of the video. Really nice final result! Thanks for describing how to use Telescopius for composition.
Definitely an art. That's an amazing shot. I can go back to my images when I first started 3 years ago and realize the data wasn't all that bad I just didn't know how to best process it (well maybe not to the very beginning some of that was bad). With NB filters, I can see how I processed something last year and realize I don't like it now so will reprocess it.
Depends on what are you trying to achieve. Some AP is for science, some AP to make pretty images. Some AP to record rare events (comets, novas, some transitions, planets with special shadows) Some AP (or rather EAA) is just an alternative to visual.
Thanks Nico for this great video! One aspect that I find truelly unique about astrophotography is that anyone in the world can shoot the same target in the same night, from almost everywhere. Like, Nico can shoot M42 from his garden in the US and Quiv from his roof in Tokyo. The target will be practically identical. The same is true for time, M42 will look almost identical a couple hundred years from now and someone could in theory take a very similar picture to the one I took yesterday. This isn't possible in any other form of photography, if we wanted to take pictures of say a wedding or a mountain we'd have to go there, and even then the images would look quite different, depending on the exact moment and angle, light, position etc. It's obvious, but I findit fascinating
Excellent video and image, thank you. I like the image turned 90° CCW and presented in portrait orientation. I like the flow then from the Toast down the sky. But it’s all a matter of personal preference in creating your art!
Composition, color palette manipulation, blending. All can be applied to AP. Thus, AP can be considered an art form. Not too mention, "art is in the eye of the beholder."
Interesting analysis, Nico. As an artist and gallery curator I’d like to weigh in. We can accept that astrophotography can be art, but the limitations are far greater than just the manipulation of light, starting with composition. Even a simple portrait can have an infinite number of variations, depending on the orientation of the sitter to the camera, the clothes, the placement of the hands, the depth of field, the expression of the sitter, etc. I could go on and on. All this in addition to the lighting. AP is like everyone gets the same orientation, depth of field, expression, lighting and starts from there. In essence like a single portrait photo distributed to all potential astrophotographers who then only can manipulate color and crop it. Most astrophotographers are technically trained and inclined and not artistically trained. An artist could take their raw material into Photoshop and almost certainly come out with a better final image. You are a creative as well as a technical guy. Your image in the is video is impressive. But I would disagree with your analysis of how the eye moves through it. I see an “x” with a centered and fairly static composition. If anything, the eye is drawn to the dramatic shape in the upper right, and stays there. I guess my point is your video is an attempt to justify AP as an art and maybe a bit of a stretch, at least to me. I don’t have a problem seeing the beauty in astrophotography or the art. That doesn’t mean I expect to see it hanging in the Museum of Modern Art next to an Ansel Adams anytime soon.
You mention that Astrophotographers are not able to manipulate the light in the same way that regular photographers can. That’s true but surely our ability to filter, capture and resolve light not visible to the human eye gives us a way of manipulating light that regular photographers don’t have.
Great job on this...Totally agree, i see some astrophotos that are technically great, but horrible composition/framing. I spend a Lot of time spinning the rotation either in NINA framing, or Telescopious to find what looks best. ...and I never knew you could change the stretch, and survey in Telescopious!!!! thanks for that tip!
One more composition choice: what objects in the field of view to include. Isn't 'star reduction' a kind of composition choice? Especially when stars are 'reduced' to almost nil compared to a full visible spectrum image?
If you ask me everything is art. Since I started university I've begun to see even advanced math like using differential equations to solve a complex real world problem. The only difference between all the forms of art is the people who can enjoy it. To me elegant solutions are just as beatiful as any deep sky object or labdscape.
This! I'm a software developer, and to me an elegantly written piece of code is art. As is e.g. a well designed tool, especially when care is taken to make it aesthetically pleasing in addition to being efficient and ergonomic.
Is it me, or did this didn’t video have a clear end (apart from the ad)? I would have expected a bit of a conclusion. Loved the attention for this frequently overlooked part of making photos btw.
Astrophotography art is underrated, If I had opportunity, I would buy several good photos and put them in my house. I think in the future it will be much more developed art form and there will be many opportunities.
In the Gear section on telescopius it asks for Apature in MM or Inches. I only know it as an F number. How do i calculate or find the apature size of a camera lens?
I LOVE your capture of "Wolf's Cave", and -- in keeping with your discussion of art -- I wonder if it is possible to do a presentation that somehow approximates the depth of field 'visually' in the final product. Something that comes to mind are plastic covered photographs back in the 1960s that actually separated layers of the image between sections of plastic to provide a "3-D" look. I cannot imagine how this can be done on the computer screen or even on a flat print. Do you ever play with AI? Could this be used to create a visual 3-D effect? Inquiring minds want to know!
I like that idea! I wonder what the result would be if you used a clear plastic or glass to print each of the 3 sub-layers, either SHO or RBG, and stacked them with a little space in between. Or doubled - SHOSHO or RGBRGB
Nothing is Art until someone else says so to entitle its existence. Whether its Art or not, is mostly out of the creators hands. Without confirmation it's just a banana stuck to a wall. So that's a bloody nice picture, mate! Love the resulting image, great subject and fantastic presentation, as we are all used to from you. Thank You. I haven't got the money to hire someone else to take the subs for me, else my many dream projects would be underway. I recently saw a picture with over 1'000 hours total integration; is it really a race to most hours of integration? My favorite part of astrophotography is to point out stars in the night sky to someone that has seen my image results. The look in their faces when they start comprehending about whats up there and whats happening to it, and us.
I do not think its an art if its a composite photo to depict something real. Also a duct taped banana is not art either. My reasoning is simple. It is not thought provoking. You CAN use photography to make art, but normal astrophotography photos that arent used as such isnt art. Its a piece. Perhaps a beautiful work that has taken multiple hours, days even. But time alone doesnt make something an art. Else almost everything would be considered art. I think this thought process depreciates the value of the word the most. Its as if these days, people consider their own work, masterpieces even, a waste of time, if they cant justify it as art. Have some pride guys.
there is soooo muchhhh editing now.... i mean, the data IS there, but still. l’m not quite sure how i feel about it. it removes the awe a bit for me, expecially when i see the before/after images
It's just a hobby for me at this point trying to express myself and I've sold a few but I'm worthless anyways so it'll never amount to anything anyways but idc
How long will the notion of “ART” continue to exist? I think... not long. Since the invention of artificial intelligence, mathematically, musically and graphically, humans are less and less able to compete. Soon, robots will be writing novels, designing cathedrals, making AAA movies and TV series... Since ART is dying, there's no competition... Coz' the beauty of the sky is eternal (well.. almost)
I see 'Art' as a representation/interpretation of reality. How far away from reality it is, is up to the artist. Astrophotography is so far away from reality that it must be considered 'Art' therefore. By that I mean the amount of post processing used to present a given Astro image.
Art is about creativity and originality. Yet another cliche generic pic of the milky rising above a tree, the old car, the old barn, the old church, the old silo, the lake, has about as much artistic expression and creativity as a cover band doing stand by me at a 50th wedding anniversary. I dont care how well its done or how many hrs were spent using autotune- opps I mean editing, Mimicking something that has been done before a thousand times isnt art. If photographers were musicians 99% would be in a cruise ship cover band, talented commited and enthusiastic but creatively bankrupt. No art moves forward by mimicry.
Of course it’s ART…. You can’t control the light, but there’s far more processing involved to bring it out so every image is unique to who created it…. No two people will generate the same output with the same input… it never happens…
If someone can duct tape a banana to a wall and call it art, then taking hours of photos and compiling them together is 100% art
I am not a fan of the piece with the banana taped to a wall, but your comment reveals a lack of understanding of what art is. In astrophotography, the elements that make it art are the same as in any image, whether a painting or a photo: originality, composition, color, shape, etc. The technical side is the craft.
@willrothfuss8470 if art is subjective how can you go and say who knows what art is?
Great video. Love your composition ideas. As a photographer from the 60's on to retirement I think your ideas are excellent. Teaching how to use this for Astrophotography is phenomenal. I am at the point in my journey to start considering along with the technical stuff. 👍
The way I like to describe astrophotography is this way : the word "photography" comes from the ancient Greek words "photos" and "graphos", which translate to "writing with light". Astrophotography is then the art of writing (or drawing) with a very distant and ancient light. It's like drawing using very old ink or charcoal, or forging with meteorite iron, or photographing using past century silver plate. It's also incredibly humbling toward the source material once we think about it that way 🙂
wow i really i like that connection with tracing the word back to it's roots. particularly because astrophotography is so fundamentally different in which where the light comes from.
all forms of photography use light that comes from the sun. photos in the day use light from the sun, if the photo is lit up by lights, it's more than likely the light was powered by an energy sourced traced back to the sun, even if you use the flash on your camera, your batteries would have gotten their power from an energy source traced back to the sun.
however, with astrophotography you utilise the feint light of other stars to create an image. that's why i think this niche of photography is so unique :)
Fundamentals, or elements of art should be discussed more in astrophotography, because they’re just as important in every art form. Really super that you’re digging into this. It will help everyone to make better photos.
Beautiful image! Thanks for explaining your thought process behind the composition
The better I get at processing the more I am able to take the photo and manipulate what I want in it. To pull out what detail I want. I dont think people realize how difficult astrophotography processing can be. It is an art to me
100%
Something being difficult doesnt make it an art :)
@@Aneliuse no, but I think people dont understand the process and think we point and click and bam beautiful photo. There are a lot of personal choices that come into play during processing that makes it an art
@Aneliuse there's a lot of different ways to process this data and some actually get funky with it and you would even call it art
I'm really glad you're talking about this. Coming from a photographic background, paying attention to composition is second nature to me. It's not an esthetic that I see a lot of in astrophotography in general which is too bad. As you've pointed out, it's not about the gear or what software you use. It's all about the eye, taste and sensitivity that the photographer brings to the subject.
Finally, someone is talking about this. It's kind of like the elephant in the room. When you are able to get the correct date, composition is probably the most important factor in making a photo stand out.
Damn Nico, that image is badass. 100 hours. jeez it'd take me 2 years to get that. I'd love to see a deep dive in post processing on how you interrogated SHO and RGB. remember, it don't mean a thing unless you print it!
I would add another parameter: light filtering and compositing. Edit: I realized now that you mentioned this at the end of the video. Really nice final result! Thanks for describing how to use Telescopius for composition.
Definitely an art. That's an amazing shot. I can go back to my images when I first started 3 years ago and realize the data wasn't all that bad I just didn't know how to best process it (well maybe not to the very beginning some of that was bad). With NB filters, I can see how I processed something last year and realize I don't like it now so will reprocess it.
Awesome work, Nico! Great discussion about composition too.
Depends on what are you trying to achieve. Some AP is for science, some AP to make pretty images. Some AP to record rare events (comets, novas, some transitions, planets with special shadows) Some AP (or rather EAA) is just an alternative to visual.
Killer shot Nico. Great video :)
Thanks Nico for this great video!
One aspect that I find truelly unique about astrophotography is that anyone in the world can shoot the same target in the same night, from almost everywhere. Like, Nico can shoot M42 from his garden in the US and Quiv from his roof in Tokyo. The target will be practically identical. The same is true for time, M42 will look almost identical a couple hundred years from now and someone could in theory take a very similar picture to the one I took yesterday.
This isn't possible in any other form of photography, if we wanted to take pictures of say a wedding or a mountain we'd have to go there, and even then the images would look quite different, depending on the exact moment and angle, light, position etc.
It's obvious, but I findit fascinating
"Akin to stamp collecting" - made me lol
It is art, for me. It's beautiful, it takes craft, failing, trying, fiddling with different things etc and the rewards are sweet
Excellent video and image, thank you. I like the image turned 90° CCW and presented in portrait orientation. I like the flow then from the Toast down the sky. But it’s all a matter of personal preference in creating your art!
Absolutely an artform! Im so excited to unbox my first 100+ telescope 🤩
Composition, color palette manipulation, blending. All can be applied to AP. Thus, AP can be considered an art form. Not too mention, "art is in the eye of the beholder."
The more I learn, the less I know. That's an AMAZING shot! I''m struggling to get 20 hours on a target without growing board - let alone 120 hours! 🤣
Interesting analysis, Nico. As an artist and gallery curator I’d like to weigh in.
We can accept that astrophotography can be art, but the limitations are far greater than just the manipulation of light, starting with composition. Even a simple portrait can have an infinite number of variations, depending on the orientation of the sitter to the camera, the clothes, the placement of the hands, the depth of field, the expression of the sitter, etc. I could go on and on. All this in addition to the lighting. AP is like everyone gets the same orientation, depth of field, expression, lighting and starts from there. In essence like a single portrait photo distributed to all potential astrophotographers who then only can manipulate color and crop it.
Most astrophotographers are technically trained and inclined and not artistically trained. An artist could take their raw material into Photoshop and almost certainly come out with a better final image.
You are a creative as well as a technical guy. Your image in the is video is impressive. But I would disagree with your analysis of how the eye moves through it. I see an “x” with a centered and fairly static composition. If anything, the eye is drawn to the dramatic shape in the upper right, and stays there.
I guess my point is your video is an attempt to justify AP as an art and maybe a bit of a stretch, at least to me. I don’t have a problem seeing the beauty in astrophotography or the art. That doesn’t mean I expect to see it hanging in the Museum of Modern Art next to an Ansel Adams anytime soon.
Couldn’t agree more!
You mention that Astrophotographers are not able to manipulate the light in the same way that regular photographers can. That’s true but surely our ability to filter, capture and resolve light not visible to the human eye gives us a way of manipulating light that regular photographers don’t have.
Would definitely love a mosaic tutorial or explanation! 🙂
Great job on this...Totally agree, i see some astrophotos that are technically great, but horrible composition/framing. I spend a Lot of time spinning the rotation either in NINA framing, or Telescopious to find what looks best. ...and I never knew you could change the stretch, and survey in Telescopious!!!! thanks for that tip!
Definitely it is! Out of 100 people, how many can create art? Space if often ignored.
One more composition choice: what objects in the field of view to include. Isn't 'star reduction' a kind of composition choice? Especially when stars are 'reduced' to almost nil compared to a full visible spectrum image?
If you ask me everything is art. Since I started university I've begun to see even advanced math like using differential equations to solve a complex real world problem. The only difference between all the forms of art is the people who can enjoy it. To me elegant solutions are just as beatiful as any deep sky object or labdscape.
This! I'm a software developer, and to me an elegantly written piece of code is art. As is e.g. a well designed tool, especially when care is taken to make it aesthetically pleasing in addition to being efficient and ergonomic.
If everything is art then nothing is art.
The heavens declare the glory of God…you are just bringing it to light. Thanks for your hard work in making this possible
Is it me, or did this didn’t video have a clear end (apart from the ad)? I would have expected a bit of a conclusion. Loved the attention for this frequently overlooked part of making photos btw.
Astrophotography art is underrated, If I had opportunity, I would buy several good photos and put them in my house. I think in the future it will be much more developed art form and there will be many opportunities.
In the Gear section on telescopius it asks for Apature in MM or Inches. I only know it as an F number. How do i calculate or find the apature size of a camera lens?
f-ratio = focal length / aperture
Solving for aperture: aperture = focal length / f-ratio
Is there an easy way to get the framing transfered over into nina or do i have to copy over the coordinates by hand?
I LOVE your capture of "Wolf's Cave", and -- in keeping with your discussion of art -- I wonder if it is possible to do a presentation that somehow approximates the depth of field 'visually' in the final product. Something that comes to mind are plastic covered photographs back in the 1960s that actually separated layers of the image between sections of plastic to provide a "3-D" look. I cannot imagine how this can be done on the computer screen or even on a flat print. Do you ever play with AI? Could this be used to create a visual 3-D effect? Inquiring minds want to know!
I like that idea! I wonder what the result would be if you used a clear plastic or glass to print each of the 3 sub-layers, either SHO or RBG, and stacked them with a little space in between. Or doubled - SHOSHO or RGBRGB
YES
Nothing is Art until someone else says so to entitle its existence. Whether its Art or not, is mostly out of the creators hands.
Without confirmation it's just a banana stuck to a wall. So that's a bloody nice picture, mate!
Love the resulting image, great subject and fantastic presentation, as we are all used to from you. Thank You.
I haven't got the money to hire someone else to take the subs for me, else my many dream projects would be underway.
I recently saw a picture with over 1'000 hours total integration; is it really a race to most hours of integration?
My favorite part of astrophotography is to point out stars in the night sky to someone that has seen my image results.
The look in their faces when they start comprehending about whats up there and whats happening to it, and us.
I do not think its an art if its a composite photo to depict something real. Also a duct taped banana is not art either.
My reasoning is simple. It is not thought provoking. You CAN use photography to make art, but normal astrophotography photos that arent used as such isnt art. Its a piece. Perhaps a beautiful work that has taken multiple hours, days even. But time alone doesnt make something an art. Else almost everything would be considered art. I think this thought process depreciates the value of the word the most.
Its as if these days, people consider their own work, masterpieces even, a waste of time, if they cant justify it as art. Have some pride guys.
Yes, much better than bananas in a wall
I care
100% art.
there is soooo muchhhh editing now.... i mean, the data IS there, but still. l’m not quite sure how i feel about it. it removes the awe a bit for me, expecially when i see the before/after images
Maybe. But, the process of obtaining and processing it certainly is.
I don't know if astrophotography is art, but it's what I sell the most of, and I hope to sell a lot more of it.
It's just a hobby for me at this point trying to express myself and I've sold a few but I'm worthless anyways so it'll never amount to anything anyways but idc
How long will the notion of “ART” continue to exist?
I think... not long.
Since the invention of artificial intelligence, mathematically, musically and graphically, humans are less and less able to compete.
Soon, robots will be writing novels, designing cathedrals, making AAA movies and TV series...
Since ART is dying, there's no competition... Coz' the beauty of the sky is eternal (well.. almost)
Yes it's art, obviously
I see 'Art' as a representation/interpretation of reality. How far away from reality it is, is up to the artist. Astrophotography is so far away from reality that it must be considered 'Art' therefore. By that I mean the amount of post processing used to present a given Astro image.
Art is about creativity and originality. Yet another cliche generic pic of the milky rising above a tree, the old car, the old barn, the old church, the old silo, the lake, has about as much artistic expression and creativity as a cover band doing stand by me at a 50th wedding anniversary. I dont care how well its done or how many hrs were spent using autotune- opps I mean editing, Mimicking something that has been done before a thousand times isnt art. If photographers were musicians 99% would be in a cruise ship cover band, talented commited and enthusiastic but creatively bankrupt. No art moves forward by mimicry.
Nightscapes are art deep space imaging.....tbh not really
Really?
Of course it’s ART…. You can’t control the light, but there’s far more processing involved to bring it out so every image is unique to who created it…. No two people will generate the same output with the same input… it never happens…
Who cares?
I care
Who asked that you care @@FranchDressing
I care