Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy01
That argument seems a little simplistic Ivo - can we not be/do both ie: create art from scientifically valid astro images? 
I'm hugely in favour of pushing established boundaries, all the way over the cliff if need be to create interesting and appealing images, and I'm not alone in that quest! 
The debate about what's real or not is hugely subjective, as none of us have a warp capable starship to prove any of it,  so why wouldn't you delight in something that helps ground based imaging punch through atmospheric distortion? 
This is simply the next tool in refinement of post processes. Did everyone scream it's not real when digital imaging arrived? or CMOS, or wavelet sharpening, or starmasks, etc...
Semantics aside, some of these arguments sound like the church telling Copernicus that the Sun revolved around the earth and anything else is heresy!
So lighten up peeps, it's relatively new but AI is here to stay, and it's learning - just hope no-one founds Skynet anytime soon and we'll all be fine  |
Andy, mate... what are you on?
What you're describing is astro phantasy not astro photography. Maybe IIS needs an additional section called astro art then that would work.