4 ms·
For pure visual observation you might be right, but any sort of amateur astrophotography is already significantly affected and is only going to get worse becaus
by RReverser 5y ago
For pure visual observation you might be right, but any sort of amateur astrophotography is already significantly affected and is only going to get worse because 1) it's usually more wide-field than in professional observatories, which significantly increases the chance of Starlink streaks and 2) the ~6.5 magnitude is still a lot brighter than all the interesting deep-sky objects and is only dimmer than stars visible to the human eye.
- WithinReason 5y agoAmateur astrophotography usually stitches multiple short exposures together to simulate long exposure, where it's trivial to remove frames with streaks. You could also automatically detect the extent of the streaks and only remove those.
- RReverser 5y agoWith guiding you're usually aiming for 5-10 minute exposures per frame. That usually results in each frame having at least several streaks. Sure, those are technically still short and can be cancelled out, but astrophotography is already challenging enough and has plenty of other noise sources without adding more fuel to the problem. And that's now, when we're not close to the planned tens of thousands of satellites by Starlink above, and other vendors like Amazon only starting to plan their similar programs. That's why early feedback is important - otherwise the sky will be ruined in the best case for decades to come.