Today’s Apod (gasp!)

[Andy01]

Might as well give up now when overprocessed rubbish like this gets a gong...
https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/astropix.html
What were they thinking? :screwy:

[traveller]

It's interesting, unusual, and ummm, different...

[StuTodd]

To be fair, APOD isn't all about pretty pictures.
The image clearly shows how the cluster has "eaten" a path through the surrounding gas and dust. I had no idea there was that much surrounding the region.

Interesting and informative, not just another pretty image.

[LewisM]

Looks far better than my overprocessed messes.

But, yeah looks like bubblegum in a urinal...

It’s deep though. Not sure I have seen it that expansive before.

(image originally discussed: https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap171114.html)

[N1]

It ain't pretty but I didn't quite appreciate how much was actually going on in that region so thanks for the heads up. I'll take this over perfectly round stars and low noise any time because it shows something new. Plus I'm sure a cleaner version but with the same amount of detail will get an even better reception. OTOH, just about any picture is overprocessed crap compared to the eyepiece view ;)

[bojan]

Not "pretty picture".. but very informative.

[billdan]

I agree with Andy too much processing.
I see it also with M42 and running man as well, some people just have too much background flux and M42 and running man just disappear into the background. Which for me just destroys the image.

[multiweb]

Pretty deep. It's always hard to make a very faint fov look good unless you spend ages on it and even though you always have to deal with gradients, sky glow, passing clouds, LP. So it's actually not bad at all considering what he was trying to illustrate which is probably the reason why APOD featured it.

[DarkKnight]

I'm very new to this astro stuff and struggle to decide what my finished images should look like.

I look at this shot as not so much an attempt to present a 'Pretty Pleiades' picture, but rather an attempt to put the Pleiades in perspective with their surroundings.

[xelasnave]

I went to look with Andys words burning in my ears and forgettting to angle the lappy just right thought he is right.. I was conditioned to see but adjusting the angle and looking its not bad considering ...maybe the best way to judge is for members to do a better one ...I looked for others on the web and it is surprising some that are out theree. For my part seeing this was an education on a system I thought I had a fair handle upon..

I did not find anything about the set up to get this great photo...how would a f5 8 inch go??? with a dslr?

alex

alex

[Visionary]

Looks like Visually Impaired Astronomers will be able to have a crack at APOD. Even I can see this is rubbish! I think I may submit one of my "stunning" out of focus, poorly processed Lunar images, who knows!

[iborg]

The link as been changed

Try https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap171114.html

Philip

[DJT]

Hmmmm.. there are people here who have overcome challenges to produce some really stunning images. You might want to rethink the first sentence.

[Regulus]

I know!!
i saw this this morning and was totally bamboozled as to how it could even be considered.
I'd be embarrassed for anyone to see it if it were mine.
The other link was worth a visit though. Compensartion of sorts :-)
https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/1711/NGC7789Rose_Seigneuret2048.jpg

[Visionary]

I am Legally Blind, & I produce truly horrid images with excellent gear. I think my post is 100% in order.

[Slawomir]

Agreed. Removing stars is a crime against the Universe...

[Atmos]

Does THIS (https://www.astrobin.com/full/255947/0/) get me sent to hell for removing stars from their birthing place?

[LewisM]

I don't "get" the idea behind star removal - I thought the idea was to show as MUCH as possible with astrophotography :shrug: but...

OK, one way ticket to Hades purchased on your behalf. It might be a cold day though... :cold:

[Slawomir]

It is a fine image, no doubt about that :thumbsup: but IMO looks somehow castrated without the stars...

[Andy01]

(Cough) Getting back on topic...

Probably the worst APOD I have seen in a loooong time - way overprocessed and pushed beyond the limit.
I applaud what the author has intended to do to reveal the structures & dust, but one cannot simply cut corners and stretch insufficient data beyond all hope in the expectation a decent result.
This needs a LOT more exposure time, lots and lots more exposure time - then a big stretch to bring out the best from the data.
This attempt has not been well done at all imo.

[multiweb]

Fred shall be unleashed upon this thread... release the Kraken! :scared::scared3::sad::sadeyes:

[SimmoW]

Colin, up the decon about 1000% then it might be guaranteed an APOD!

Im conflicted, in one respect i find the image stunning, but on closer inspection its awful. But yes, it really highlights the surrounding region so well.

Sadly, i do feel for the imager, seeing the initial questioning and comments would be very hurtful to him, esp on the very first day of release.

[Hemi]

I thought the image was interesting, and informative. It prompted me to read more about it. I’ve seen many pretty, suitably processed (whatever that is) images of plaedes
I find rude, disparaging comments without a hint of critique puzzling, and stops me posting my beginners over processed rubbish.

I’m sure the goals of imagers are very different, from purely art (I thought your starless image was beautiful Colin), to pretty pictures (often devoid of a story), to scientific representation. After only 3 years or so in this hobby, and firmly a beginner in visual, EAA and imaging camps, I still spend almost as much time reading about the things I’m looking at.

I’m glad it got the apod, it prompted this discussion for one, not a lot of images can do that.

Just my 2cents.

Hemi

[LewisM]

I will rustle up a severed Medusa head.

[SimmoW]

+1!

[theodog]

+2!!

[Bassnut]

WTF !. What teeth grinding rubbish for an APOD!. Square stars with dark halos buried in noise and Random flaring isn't a crime against the universe!?.I'll take starless any day thanks. The lazy unthoughtfull processing is so bad and distracting that any scientific value is lost in the shear butchery forced on the unsuspecting viewer.

[theodog]

I think I have been looking at the wrong image.

The one of M45 -:eyepop::(

The rose :thumbsup:.

Cheers

[multiweb]

:lol: Good popcorn movie. I was watching it only two nights ago.