It started out as a pencil sketch of 30 Doradus (Tarantula) then Photographed, placed into Photoshop, Inverted, Reddened and all the levels played with, then some of the stars added again.
What I would like to know is: Is it taking sketches too far? Would Astro sketches be better just left in plain old Inverted Black & white? After all, they are only sketches, or is it fair game to fiddle?
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder Ken. And that red colour to me is beautiful! Seeing it's "art" I reckon the only "rule" is the limit on one's imagination (if any). I would perhaps catagorise that sketch as astro-art.
I prefer 'Traditional Sketching' too as a hobby and an interest.
Just wondering if it is still 'fair' in the sense of 'Astrophotography' v's 'Astro sketching'.
Especially considering some people spend thousands of dollars on their photography set-ups and many hours to get that perfect shot.
Black and white suits as astro sketches are normally a record of whats seen at the eyepiece. If you can see colour like that at the eyepiece im jealous
Looks good to me Ken. Just my opinion, i think one should sketch what one can see. If you see colour in your object then do colour, it does bring out the detail pretty good when the colour is there but the lead pencil scetches do a mighty fine job as well. If you start producing sketches like this Ken, you should think about submitting some to the magazines. . You can design my tatoos any day..
I can't see much difference in stacking and adjusting digital images, then there is other wave lengths false colour images x-ray etc, maybe film is the real deal but there all interesting to me. Your sketch is unique and if that's your way Ken go for it, I for one like your sketch.
there should two types of recording (sketching,imaging)
1.what you see with your eye.
2.what a long exposure with a camera or this lovely piece of work can produce.
people that are new to the game can see what they would see with no false promises thru a scope.
people that are interested in the beauty of space can then sit for hours and hours and look at the wonderful work that ken and eddie and striker and everyone else have been producing thru different techniques. They are all magnificent works of art in the sense that there are guys with a lot of skill using the sky to produce beauty!
ehy that looks great ken. i'd be more inclined to call is astro art rather then sketching tho.
just one thing, the 2 stars in the bottom right are a little er.... square
<shrug> as long as you aren't trying to pass it off as "what you'll see at the EP", I don't see the problem with it. In fact, I think its quite pretty.
That particular DSO isn't visible from where I live (you guys get all the real goodies) so taking it for what I perceive it to be; an artistic rendition of a DSO, I think it looks great!
I spent enough time doing and teaching photography (composition and darkroom work) to know that even something as aperantly objective as taking a picture of a broken down car by the side of the road can be manipulated to seem: artistic, an example of poverty, a historical relic, or a collector's dream. Its all about presentation, processing, and the byline.
I don't put anymore "realism" into photos I see posted on the Hubble website than I do in your sketches. Just put them in context and realise what they are: what a person sees... Doesn't matter if it is at an eyepiece or a computer monitor - its all interpolation and interpretation.
Yup, besides the colour I can get detail similar to that too. shouldnt be too hard unless you are in a capital city somewhere... of course a filter helps too
I can't wait for some sky to get my pencil-hand working. Then I can sketch what I really see, not muck around with sketching magazine pics. Fills the cloudy nights though I guess.
