4 ms·
It looks a little grainy / too much sharpening to my eye. Natural images tend have more blended features instead of looking like sand.
by platz 6y ago
It looks a little grainy / too much sharpening to my eye. Natural images tend have more blended features instead of looking like sand.
- EForEndeavour 6y agoI can kind of see what you mean, but I wonder if this is actually a result of the subject, not processing. The night sky is absolutely peppered with pinpoints of light far smaller than individual image pixels (resolvable stars) which are quite unlike typical terrestrial scenes.
- platz 6y agoThe effect seems to be more noticeable in the areas filled with gas. I'm not saying that stars aren't pinpoints or sometimes are just single pixles, but just it overall looks like some post-sharpening has definitely been applied aggressively to my eye.
- foo_barrio 6y agoLooking at this pic of the Orion nebula it looks like even the smoothest, darkest areas have tons of stars in them: * https://orion2020v5b.spaceforeverybody.com/ https://orion2020v5b.spaceforeverybody.com/ This is also a much smaller area of the sky. The higher acuity of the image might actually be more representative of what the telescope actually sees. The smooth darkness you are used to seeing might be similar to how some people prefer music where the treble rolls off (like tube amps or sennheizer 650s headphones) vs people preferring a more linear freq response.
- platz 6y agowell, the orion image you linked doesn't look like it's been over-sharpened, in contrast to the OP image. I'm not saying there's a way to tell just by eyeballing it, but that's what it smells like.
- gbrown 6y agoIn astrophotography there's (almost) no such thing as "natural". It's definitely an aesthetic, but it's based on "real" data.
- platz 6y agoIt can be true that it's both based on real data and that there is an aggressive amount of post-sharpening applied.
- gbrown 6y agoThis is true, but it's also true that making faint features visible (like the dark, dusty regions) often requires the use of local contrast, sharpening, and masks. Also, in the case of this specific image, I think it's important to note just how deep the images are - they're processed for high resolution in the individual components, so the mosaic has an absolutely huge resolution. When downscaled to look at the whole thing zoomed out, that might give some of the impression of over-sharpness.
- realo 6y agoWhen someone shows you the moon, do you start talking about her finger? Peace!
- platz 6y agoI definitely would
- pdpi 6y agoIt has a distinctly HDR-y look to it but no meaningful sharpening. I think the grain is just a fruit of having noisier sensors back in 2009