I think you've really hit on something by talking about black point and saturation a fair amount when talking about deep sky images. Those are two choices in processing that do have a huge impact on the final look of the photo. My hesitance about going too black in the sky or too saturated in the nebulae has always been over the loss of detail. Something I've often thought about is: why preserving details (information) in the image is seemingly the most important aspect to me? It's not like I'm processing Hubble images like Judy Schmidt where she is constantly finding incredible phenomenon with her careful approach to processing. Thanks for the video. It was an honor to be included, and it obviously got me thinking!
Hey I'm glad you saw it Nico! I didn't ask anyone's permission first but I assumed it would be ok. I didn't roast anyone (hehe) I just thought it was super interesting to look at gallery indexes as a whole and see everyone's "signature" style and how they differ and why. I agree with you on the black stretch which is probably why our target dynamic ranges are so similar. :)
@@DylanODonnell Forgot to mention, I think I will have the chance to interview Adam Block in 2022 about his approach to astrophotography. Your discussion of his style sparked a couple ideas, but let me know if there is something you'd like me to ask him.
@@NebulaPhotos oh interesting! I’d love to know what his option of that pixinsight faq .. there are 2 sections that are very ranty and almost ideological about why photoshop sucks (basically). I understand where the author is coming from and the PI philosophy generally but it seems very fundamental to suggest the two programs can’t be used together.
@@NebulaPhotos I think most people will agree with that they're both good at different things. Pixinsight excells at preprocessing and linear image editing (Colour calibration, background extraction etc). Once you start comparing with non-linear images, it gets a bit murky. Photoshop is great when it comes to fine control over the colours of an image, but then on the other hand pixinsight has some amazing control over the image with wavelets, LHE, and morphological transformation. Its not really a surprise that a large amount of people get 'most of the way there' with pixinsight, and do the final, but super cirital, processes in photoshop where pix fails.
I am honored to have been included by you Dylan. "Clean" is not something I typically associate with my life-experience. Everything is a mess! Regarding the "detail" of information I give- I do go on about many things- but it is because I do have many meaningful things to say. This is what I believe sets me apart, in the depth of my instruction, and I embrace it for better or worse! Wish I could have a fraction of the eyeballs you have on your channel... (jealous). Keep up the good work. Now I need to find a nice pair of shades...
Soo cool to see all of these different styles come together! My favourite side of astro is seeing how everyone processes differently, really inspiring to see the same parts of space in different lights :)
Good analysis! The OCD scientist in me doesn’t allow for extreme processing, so my images only take about 5 minutes to process in photoshop. However, the processing people do is incredible! I can’t believe how clean all these images are. Nice work to all!
Great overview. All the different "styles" makes astophotos from different individuals so interesting to look at and at times can offer a unique perspective on even a commonly photographed target (Antoine's blue/yellow Orion and Horsehead as an example).
In this video I think you pretty much summed up what Astrophotography is: Part photography, part art, part science. I think those three blend perfectly into a hobby that is just as fun and educational as it is frustrating. Honorable mention: The community. The willingness to share tips and tricks by almost everyone, is another thing that really drove me into this.
Great video Dylan. As usual :) I'm so impressed by the cohesiveness and general niceness of the astro photography community. I see so many other astrophotographers and youtubers commenting on this video and being supportive. Thank you everyone for all the tutorials, the great videos and of course the awesome pictures of space all of you share so freely!
Interesting video Dylan! Definitely different styles happening. I never thought of it in that way. Everyone's work featured is fantastic. Amazing what amateurs can do now imaging the night sky.
It was through Trevor Jones's channel that I discovered you :) Both Trevor and Nico are amazing astrophotographers. I love their work and yours. Cheers :)
Great video! It's nice to know that most of the people that I follow are recognized and respected by others astrophotographers, like you. Also, got to know 2 or 3 that I didn't know. Great work and images from all of you guys!
Absolutely amazing video ! Thank you for taking the time to select and introduce all these astrophotographers ! Very interesting debate on artistic vs scientific way of processing. A great one of yours !
That's really interesting! Being involved in Astrophotography for over 40 years now, I really try to understand the way people's look at things. I suspect that the apparent "style" of a photographer is very much related to his own experience in looking at things and the "baggage" of visual experience they actually have. There also are physiological and psychological rules for the way we "perceive" things like colors, details, contrasts etc. It is very interesting to try to understand the phylosophy and approach to editing an image that "drives" to a peculiar "style"... Anyway, thanks for this video, I've liked it very much! Ah, one last thing... When we get datas, we are actually "measuring" something and that's scientific, specially if You read the data values but, in the exact moment You go out of that, trying to "render" these datas to be visible by eyes or audible by ears, You are no more in the scientific "realm" since our sensitive processes are ALL interpretations of the reality mitigated by our evolution and biased for "survival" purposes... 😁
Fantastic video. Seems like when it comes to traditional photography or astrophotography the rule is the same: keep an open mind, learn from others, but at the end of the day, you do you.
It's really super cool to see sooo much variety and different styles in this hobby! Really is, pretty incredible to think about! I personally enjoy a soft, pastel like look to space but It's awesome to see how others process the same data too! Thanks for sharing Dylan, awesome video! :D
Dylan, as I start off with my astrophotography journey, you've been, as with the list of photographers a huge inspiration in helping me and many others put one foot in front of the other. You're right, we all have a style but the communication of the material is fundamentally at the heart of what we're doing. One of the things we love about astrophotography are the choices of composition that confront us as we select our targets. Which lens or telescope are we gonna use? How much data are we gonna need? Which sensor do we need/have. Besides the color, how do we want our viewers to feel? Are we answering the questions that the viewers have or just adding more? Do we know what we're shooting? Does the viewer actually know what is happening in the image or is it just looking like an abstract fine art photography image? Detail, like you highlighted with Adam Block is part of the story. When we have a very fine image composition like Judy Schmidt we _understand_ what is happening, the science part too. The pretty pictures are indeed the gateway drug but we're all trying to understand, interpret, and then communicate the very difficult art and science of doing this. Now, You're spot on when you talk about saturation and color because that's part of what we need to communicate the story, technically. But at some point viewers want to know what's happening. Thank you Dylan for helping us all remember that something needs to definitely be communicated with what you're shooting. I think that defines your style- and I certainly hope you can keep delivering the message.
I am currently packing and moving to a dark sky spot. I am at the ocean like you are and don't get enough clear skies. Great video for beginning processors. Telling them to NOT push the image is best advice. Thanks for all your work and inspiration.
Awesome video, and I loved the commentary with examples of the styles. Some of those you reviewed I haven’t looked closely at their work, so I appreciate the tips! It certainly emphasizes just how much of ourselves we put into the image, and that, for example, not all M42s are alike.
Great video Dylan!! - I think people really do develop their own style over time when they start getting good enough data to express themselves through it! :-) 👍👍
very original content! something different yet very interesting. Awesome way of presenting yours and their work. Im also a fan of Nico and Sara Wager. Have a look at Ian Barredo's work as well, he too has a different style which is really awesome!. More power Dylan
Astrophotography is one of those areas where most are very supportive of each other.. Very cool that you brought up all these awesome photographers / astronomers... gives me more work to look at and consider...
Many thanks, Dylan - a great overview of some of the heroes of the hobby. Loads of inspiration and aspiration. Some of these images defy belief - how did a hobby become so perfect - the images are so clean?!
This is an excellent video Dylan. Really well thought through and presented. You have also highlighted the work of some people that I had never heard of, including one who lives relatively close to me! Very thought provoking, it's made me think about my 'scatter gun' approach and whether I should focus on one particular type of target and develop my skills in that area. Thank you!
Really great showcase of the wonders that all of you bring to us and show us what is really out there, and what amateur astronomers can strive for in this golden age. Your presentation and commentary was really cool how it did show the subtle artistic 'takes' each person does bring to their work. And recognizing Original Gangster (I didn't know what that meant until recently either!) was cool too. You are all incredible and the world needs this kind of inspiration. Clear Skies!!
Great interpretations of some of my favorite astrophotographers! Thanks Dylan :-) Just curious, how long until we get an ASIAir Plus review from you? ;-)
Thanks! I've avoided reviewing the ASIAir only because I'm not the target market. I never go anywhere and my gear is always setup! It wouldn't be a fair review and would actually take a lot of effort to rewire my obs completely for a single review of a box. :)
Hi Dylan, I purchased a NexDome this past December (2021). I took delivery this past spring. However, I needed to build a deck for my NexDome. I am still in the process of completing this build. I am curious when you got the NexDome V2. How do I know which dome I have given when I purchased it? Thanks in advance for any information you can provide. I enjoyed your video. Thanks!
Very fair and honest assessment of your peers’ work (and your own). Mainly critiquing color and you also waded into overall style. I’ve always noticed your tendency for a slight pastel, which I find pleasant and dreamy. Color is totally subjective. This is part of the reason why we see so many varying styles. Everyone has their own tastes and to some degree, limitations, either because of their equipment or their acquisition location, even computer monitor color calibration can play a huge roll. Without these equipment limitations, we can see how Judy can essentially let the data do the talking without needing to adopt some form of compensating processing technique. Styles definitely change over time, and this is also related to perhaps upgrading equipment or simply improvements in processing skills. But there is some subjective style change happening. There are yet, still many more artistic elements to consider besides color. You gave us an important bone to chew on, Professor, and you raised everyone’s awareness level several notches.
I have learned so much from Nico, Adam, DSO Imager, Dylan, and some cool tricks from Astroblender. Thanks for giving us free tutorials and how to improve our imaging! BTW, your website deography is really nice. Lot of very beautiful pictures
While I don't do astrophotography, astrophotography is an art form, and many do get the most out of it. Styles, colours, etc will vary, also depending on how your eyes interpret colour, so colour will also vary. With me its EAA, so between visual and astrophotography, so use the camera as a live visual enhancement tool rather than saving. While I can and do save what's on screen, at times, they are not amazing and cannot even compare to any astrophotography. But have the ability to save stuff if I wish, so in the end becomes simple astrophotography. But love seeing yours and other astrophotography work as an art form.
This was a really intersting take on astrophotography, thanks! As always, I was in a good mood towards the end of your video until I saw your PHD2 total RMS error! Tracking below 0.3"!? I am so envious. I'm even sulking a little bit... I'll never get to that with my EQ6 Pro/C9.25 combo.
Many thanks for this video, Dylan, especially for listing other astrophotographers that I (and likely many others) were unfamiliar with. The question I often have when viewing many such images is: Where does the realism end and the artifice begin?
Dylan i really enjoy your videos, your logic and humor makes total sense for me, would love this type of analysis or styles on the diferent techniques these and other astrophotographers use to help others, I mean some of these you mentioned are really for more enjoyable depending how advaced your technique and experience is as an astrophotographer, for instance astroed or astroblender are some of the most helpful guys in RUclips, and well sometimes you too :)
I worked in a lab. Despite written procedures every operative would manage to do the same job a different way, perhaps the various tasks in a different order. But the results could be replicated exactly by another operative. Astro images will vary, subjectively the image is presented differently, but objectively it's the same data. Until we start taking quantitative measurements of the data e.g. spectrometry, they're mostly pretty pictures.
Wow. You really stepped it up on this one, Dylan. Something for all of us who frequent your site! Really, well done, Dylan, well done. I'm beginning to think you are a borderline genius. No joke.
It's the mouse maze of operating photochopping pictures. The best results without hitting a wall of disappointment in the maze of filters gets them to what they post. That's the major point of style. I'm sure you know after remembering back looking at the clock seeing how much time has passed and not at the result you want. Now for you it's does the dog approve ;)
Great work Dylan. You and many of the others whose styles you have highlighted have been quite inspiring to me. I am coming from a long way back in terms of capability at both capturing and processing the data but I see the benchmarks you and the others have set for me to aspire to. We have just bought a place that I think is about Bortle 2 at worst so I will lack excuses that previously were an issue fom my home location presently. I have big plans for a home observatory but that may not be for a year or two! I need to slow down for now and get better with the equipment I have first I think.
They certainly do Dylan! One guy one Ice inspace has a very "Luminous, Colourful and SATURATED" style..so much so that I had to wear sunglasses JUST to tone the view down a notch..nearly went blind and seasick just looking at his work..didn't just "catch the eye"..caught the stomach as well!
I think you pretty much hit the nail on the head, Dylan. Science isn't cold and straight-laced, only one way about it. What it describes is beautiful in so many different ways. So, why not depict that beauty as art? Why not make it aesthetically pleasing? Every artist since time began has his or her own style. I see no reason why an astrophotographer shouldn't have a style, either. One of the most famous of all astrophotographs, the Pillars of Creation was shown in the Hubble palette. That, in and of itself, is a style selected by the people who put the data together!
Huh, no Peach? Seeing Wager's work compared to the others made it really clear how her work looks almost three-dimensional. Such amazing stuff. Goals...
Great video. I've only been doing astrophotography since 2017 or so but have learned one great truth. Good astrophotography is hard work! (And I'm lazy. ;) My style is a hodge-podge of okay images and half-baked targets. I thoroughly enjoy the process of capturing data and enjoying the night sky, but endless hours of computer time is like pulling teeth. Maybe someday...but for now, I'm content tinkering, learning, and watching the masters do it. Cheers.
Awesome stuff! One of my all-time favorite astrophotographers is a fellow country man of yours - David Malin, Siding Spring Anglo-Australian Observatory.
Don't take me wrong I love all of them but somehow this one feels like best of the latest uploads, defo most meaningful. Has freshly cleaned up desk anything to do with this? Cheers!
That's interesting thanks.. it's one of the few I didn't plan or script at all.. I just opened the tabs for the 11 people and went on a rant .. maybe I should do it more often haha.
Hi there. What would then be the True releflection of the the Nebula, Clusters, Gasses etc be. Is there a "reference" to which one can refer to, to see what the actual colours are. What guide can one use to set one's pictures that is taken. This of course not to make the picture taken look way out there, but rather to be close to the True represenation of the object. Thanx
Dylannn!! Glad you're doing well my friend. My style is simple. Yell at my rig until the star trails are manageable, and try to get an HFR that doesn't get me laughed out of the community while using makeup to cover up dust motes that my crappy flat frames didn't fix like a thirsty IG thot.
Good comparison Dylan and I like your analysis of each style. After seeing this I think I tend to lean towards towards the extreme end of saturation but hopefully not over board. I like your little ending with PI vs. PS. I do pretty much the same thing. - Cheers Kurt
Hello! I'm invitied to come in a tv program in Albania(where I live) and one of the questions they'll be asking is who or what show/books would you recommend to the public who are interested in astronomy, and since you were a big help for me and my astrophotography journey I want to ask you, can I recommend you and your channel in TV? I tried reaching you on Instagram but had no success so I had to let you know somehow.
Today you covered something I have been struggling with. If you were to take a picture of a lightbulb with a certain spectrum, say 6500 kelvin, then do the same thing using the filters you use for deep space photography, when processed, stacked and no correction, the two results are different and in my tries, the filtered are brownish. I will be the first to say, I don’t have the experience you do, another way of saying I don’t know what I am doing, and with this I have a question or two. Have you tried color correction to be accurate? Or, is it always just to be artistic to what you like. Don’t get me wrong, it was the Astrophotography that got me interested back in the ‘70s. But I couldn’t really afford any good equipment until recently. I just want to see accurate or know what accurately recording data is to make decisions I won’t have questions on later.
A good anchor for what’s “right” are two things - the star colour and the background of space. If you’re shooting RGB colour and then tune the colour balance until the dark areas or voids of space are black/dark grey with no bias in r g or b AND the stars are blue / orange .. then the colours are “true”. Everything from there (saturation, shifting into purple etc) is all fiction.
Ray! What’ve you been up to? I miss seeing your videos, too. Hope you’ve been well down in Texas. If I was down there, I’d try to hit a SpaceX launch sometime. Some day . . . .
Just a fun little comment for any budding camera people: Never put the subject in a swivel chair, because 100% of the time they WILL swivel, as Dylan does in closing section. Did I mention 100% of the time...also their feet MUST touch the floor or the will swing like a little kid does. Nice overview of some of these astro people. The one thing that stands out: Look at what us amateurs with just a few thousand dollars worth of gear can do. Sure some have an easy $10K invested, but compare that to what one would have needed to spend 20-30 years ago. I am about $2K in, and probably looking to add another level, so $2-3K more, and the mind blows on what can be created. I have seen images that rival anything prior to Hubble. Now if the clouds and smoke would only cooperate more often, as I have to drive about an hour, so my sessions have been few and far between lately. Planetary camera (ASI224) coming this week, so hoping to get some Jupiter and Saturn happening through my classic circa '78 Celestron, C-8, the one that really started things moving for amateurs, IMHO. - Cheers
I know right! It's huge... I printed it for a Star Stuff event and it's the one thing I couldn't give away. The resolution is nuts up close. Even at that size I can't see any pixels... just detail.
Awesome video, Dylan. Thanks for including me.
Wouldn't be the same video without you Chuck! Keep up the great work!
Loved it dude, thanks for including me 👍🏻
Thanks Alyn! Love your work and your videos!
I think you've really hit on something by talking about black point and saturation a fair amount when talking about deep sky images. Those are two choices in processing that do have a huge impact on the final look of the photo. My hesitance about going too black in the sky or too saturated in the nebulae has always been over the loss of detail. Something I've often thought about is: why preserving details (information) in the image is seemingly the most important aspect to me? It's not like I'm processing Hubble images like Judy Schmidt where she is constantly finding incredible phenomenon with her careful approach to processing. Thanks for the video. It was an honor to be included, and it obviously got me thinking!
Hey I'm glad you saw it Nico! I didn't ask anyone's permission first but I assumed it would be ok. I didn't roast anyone (hehe) I just thought it was super interesting to look at gallery indexes as a whole and see everyone's "signature" style and how they differ and why. I agree with you on the black stretch which is probably why our target dynamic ranges are so similar. :)
@@DylanODonnell Forgot to mention, I think I will have the chance to interview Adam Block in 2022 about his approach to astrophotography. Your discussion of his style sparked a couple ideas, but let me know if there is something you'd like me to ask him.
@@NebulaPhotos oh interesting! I’d love to know what his option of that pixinsight faq .. there are 2 sections that are very ranty and almost ideological about why photoshop sucks (basically). I understand where the author is coming from and the PI philosophy generally but it seems very fundamental to suggest the two programs can’t be used together.
@@NebulaPhotos I think most people will agree with that they're both good at different things. Pixinsight excells at preprocessing and linear image editing (Colour calibration, background extraction etc). Once you start comparing with non-linear images, it gets a bit murky. Photoshop is great when it comes to fine control over the colours of an image, but then on the other hand pixinsight has some amazing control over the image with wavelets, LHE, and morphological transformation. Its not really a surprise that a large amount of people get 'most of the way there' with pixinsight, and do the final, but super cirital, processes in photoshop where pix fails.
@@NebulaPhotos I am available anytime... we should do a RUclips thing... lol
I am honored to have been included by you Dylan. "Clean" is not something I typically associate with my life-experience. Everything is a mess! Regarding the "detail" of information I give- I do go on about many things- but it is because I do have many meaningful things to say. This is what I believe sets me apart, in the depth of my instruction, and I embrace it for better or worse! Wish I could have a fraction of the eyeballs you have on your channel... (jealous). Keep up the good work. Now I need to find a nice pair of shades...
No worries Adam! Your stuff is top tier. This isn’t a top tier list, but if it was you’d still be in it :)
Soo cool to see all of these different styles come together! My favourite side of astro is seeing how everyone processes differently, really inspiring to see the same parts of space in different lights :)
I was expecting to see you included in the list! Love your channel and your work! Ahhhh unfortunately not this time 😢
Cool stuff, super interesting to compare everyone’s style
Yeh it was interesting to flip through them side by side!
"Pretty pictures is the gateway drug to the science."
I need that on an article of clothing, stat!
I like it too!
Good analysis! The OCD scientist in me doesn’t allow for extreme processing, so my images only take about 5 minutes to process in photoshop. However, the processing people do is incredible! I can’t believe how clean all these images are. Nice work to all!
Science doesn't even need colour heh
@@DylanODonnell Yeah, asteroid photometry images are about the most boring thing on the planet. :D
So cool to see a "who's who" of Astrophotography. Well done, and kudos for bringing attention to work of so many others!
Great overview. All the different "styles" makes astophotos from different individuals so interesting to look at and at times can offer a unique perspective on even a commonly photographed target (Antoine's blue/yellow Orion and Horsehead as an example).
I love how even though we are all limited to basically shooting the same things, there is a diversity of resulting images.
In this video I think you pretty much summed up what Astrophotography is: Part photography, part art, part science. I think those three blend perfectly into a hobby that is just as fun and educational as it is frustrating. Honorable mention: The community. The willingness to share tips and tricks by almost everyone, is another thing that really drove me into this.
Great video Dylan. As usual :)
I'm so impressed by the cohesiveness and general niceness of the astro photography community. I see so many other astrophotographers and youtubers commenting on this video and being supportive. Thank you everyone for all the tutorials, the great videos and of course the awesome pictures of space all of you share so freely!
Yeh love the RUclips community .. it’s way less combative than the forum community haha
Interesting video Dylan! Definitely different styles happening. I never thought of it in that way. Everyone's work featured is fantastic. Amazing what amateurs can do now imaging the night sky.
It was through Trevor Jones's channel that I discovered you :) Both Trevor and Nico are amazing astrophotographers. I love their work and yours. Cheers :)
Hey thanks Clair! They are nice guys too hey .. thanks for subscribing to me also I appreciate it!
Great video! It's nice to know that most of the people that I follow are recognized and respected by others astrophotographers, like you. Also, got to know 2 or 3 that I didn't know. Great work and images from all of you guys!
I like Judy Schmidt's work. It is more accurate and realistically faithful to the objects being captured visually.
Absolutely amazing video ! Thank you for taking the time to select and introduce all these astrophotographers ! Very interesting debate on artistic vs scientific way of processing.
A great one of yours !
Thanks Phillippe!
That's really interesting! Being involved in Astrophotography for over 40 years now, I really try to understand the way people's look at things. I suspect that the apparent "style" of a photographer is very much related to his own experience in looking at things and the "baggage" of visual experience they actually have. There also are physiological and psychological rules for the way we "perceive" things like colors, details, contrasts etc. It is very interesting to try to understand the phylosophy and approach to editing an image that "drives" to a peculiar "style"... Anyway, thanks for this video, I've liked it very much! Ah, one last thing... When we get datas, we are actually "measuring" something and that's scientific, specially if You read the data values but, in the exact moment You go out of that, trying to "render" these datas to be visible by eyes or audible by ears, You are no more in the scientific "realm" since our sensitive processes are ALL interpretations of the reality mitigated by our evolution and biased for "survival" purposes... 😁
Fantastic video. Seems like when it comes to traditional photography or astrophotography the rule is the same: keep an open mind, learn from others, but at the end of the day, you do you.
It's really super cool to see sooo much variety and different styles in this hobby! Really is, pretty incredible to think about! I personally enjoy a soft, pastel like look to space but It's awesome to see how others process the same data too! Thanks for sharing Dylan, awesome video! :D
Dylan, as I start off with my astrophotography journey, you've been, as with the list of photographers a huge inspiration in helping me and many others put one foot in front of the other. You're right, we all have a style but the communication of the material is fundamentally at the heart of what we're doing. One of the things we love about astrophotography are the choices of composition that confront us as we select our targets. Which lens or telescope are we gonna use? How much data are we gonna need? Which sensor do we need/have. Besides the color, how do we want our viewers to feel? Are we answering the questions that the viewers have or just adding more? Do we know what we're shooting? Does the viewer actually know what is happening in the image or is it just looking like an abstract fine art photography image? Detail, like you highlighted with Adam Block is part of the story. When we have a very fine image composition like Judy Schmidt we _understand_ what is happening, the science part too. The pretty pictures are indeed the gateway drug but we're all trying to understand, interpret, and then communicate the very difficult art and science of doing this. Now, You're spot on when you talk about saturation and color because that's part of what we need to communicate the story, technically. But at some point viewers want to know what's happening. Thank you Dylan for helping us all remember that something needs to definitely be communicated with what you're shooting. I think that defines your style- and I certainly hope you can keep delivering the message.
I am currently packing and moving to a dark sky spot. I am at the ocean like you are and don't get enough clear skies. Great video for beginning processors. Telling them to NOT push the image is best advice. Thanks for all your work and inspiration.
Awesome video, and I loved the commentary with examples of the styles. Some of those you reviewed I haven’t looked closely at their work, so I appreciate the tips!
It certainly emphasizes just how much of ourselves we put into the image, and that, for example, not all M42s are alike.
Great video Dylan!! - I think people really do develop their own style over time when they start getting good enough data to express themselves through it! :-) 👍👍
I love all these photographers and particularly am loving Bray Falls. He's such a generous and kind person digitally as well.
Yoo the thumbnail 😭😂
Haha Chuckbait
Lmao
That was a great video Dylan. Very insightful. Cheers. Paul
very original content! something different yet very interesting. Awesome way of presenting yours and their work. Im also a fan of Nico and Sara Wager. Have a look at Ian Barredo's work as well, he too has a different style which is really awesome!. More power Dylan
Astrobiscuit needs to be on here!!
Oh man the list could've been so much bigger.. I had to stop opening tabs at some point!
Astrophotography is one of those areas where most are very supportive of each other.. Very cool that you brought up all these awesome photographers / astronomers... gives me more work to look at and consider...
Hi Dylan you could have included Rogelio who is an Astrophotographer from US.
Many thanks, Dylan - a great overview of some of the heroes of the hobby. Loads of inspiration and aspiration. Some of these images defy belief - how did a hobby become so perfect - the images are so clean?!
Damn. This was an in-depth video Dylan! Thanks for the excellent critique!
Thanks man!
This is an excellent video Dylan. Really well thought through and presented. You have also highlighted the work of some people that I had never heard of, including one who lives relatively close to me!
Very thought provoking, it's made me think about my 'scatter gun' approach and whether I should focus on one particular type of target and develop my skills in that area.
Thank you!
Really great showcase of the wonders that all of you bring to us and show us what is really out there, and what amateur astronomers can strive for in this golden age. Your presentation and commentary was really cool how it did show the subtle artistic 'takes' each person does bring to their work. And recognizing Original Gangster (I didn't know what that meant until recently either!) was cool too. You are all incredible and the world needs this kind of inspiration. Clear Skies!!
Great interpretations of some of my favorite astrophotographers! Thanks Dylan :-) Just curious, how long until we get an ASIAir Plus review from you? ;-)
Thanks! I've avoided reviewing the ASIAir only because I'm not the target market. I never go anywhere and my gear is always setup! It wouldn't be a fair review and would actually take a lot of effort to rewire my obs completely for a single review of a box. :)
Great video, knew only a couple of the photographers mentioned. Thanks a lot!
Brilliant Dylan - one of your very best!
Cheers Mel!
Hi Dylan, I purchased a NexDome this past December (2021). I took delivery this past spring. However, I needed to build a deck for my NexDome. I am still in the process of completing this build. I am curious when you got the NexDome V2. How do I know which dome I have given when I purchased it? Thanks in advance for any information you can provide. I enjoyed your video. Thanks!
Nice vid! Fun topic and gives the community a bit of a push =)
Cheers 🤘🏻
Very fair and honest assessment of your peers’ work (and your own). Mainly critiquing color and you also waded into overall style. I’ve always noticed your tendency for a slight pastel, which I find pleasant and dreamy. Color is totally subjective. This is part of the reason why we see so many varying styles. Everyone has their own tastes and to some degree, limitations, either because of their equipment or their acquisition location, even computer monitor color calibration can play a huge roll. Without these equipment limitations, we can see how Judy can essentially let the data do the talking without needing to adopt some form of compensating processing technique. Styles definitely change over time, and this is also related to perhaps upgrading equipment or simply improvements in processing skills. But there is some subjective style change happening. There are yet, still many more artistic elements to consider besides color. You gave us an important bone to chew on, Professor, and you raised everyone’s awareness level several notches.
Agree 💯 .. well said.
@@DylanODonnell I would add a word of advice that I’ve found helps me immeasurably - Be your own style. “To thine own self be true!”
I have learned so much from Nico, Adam, DSO Imager, Dylan, and some cool tricks from Astroblender. Thanks for giving us free tutorials and how to improve our imaging!
BTW, your website deography is really nice. Lot of very beautiful pictures
Hey thanks man!
Too cool to make the list obvs... 😁😉. Some seriously talented people out there and thanks for another great video 👍😃
While I don't do astrophotography, astrophotography is an art form, and many do get the most out of it. Styles, colours, etc will vary, also depending on how your eyes interpret colour, so colour will also vary. With me its EAA, so between visual and astrophotography, so use the camera as a live visual enhancement tool rather than saving.
While I can and do save what's on screen, at times, they are not amazing and cannot even compare to any astrophotography. But have the ability to save stuff if I wish, so in the end becomes simple astrophotography. But love seeing yours and other astrophotography work as an art form.
This was a really intersting take on astrophotography, thanks! As always, I was in a good mood towards the end of your video until I saw your PHD2 total RMS error! Tracking below 0.3"!? I am so envious. I'm even sulking a little bit... I'll never get to that with my EQ6 Pro/C9.25 combo.
Hehe
Many thanks for this video, Dylan, especially for listing other astrophotographers that I (and likely many others) were unfamiliar with. The question I often have when viewing many such images is: Where does the realism end and the artifice begin?
Finally we are seeing Dylan!
But instead of OG Kitchen background, in a real studio room.
😂
BTW Great Video!
Haha I cleaned my desk so thought I’d make the most of it.
I saw the same change in Chuck’s images. I also remember he switched to OSC from mono. I think that swap happened around the same time.
We always need to evolve. 😁
We all have a style but we’re all going to die so it doesn’t matter. This is a direct quote from Dylan.
i have a burn out almost 2 months now....but after this video i want to do astrophotography again! Thank you Dylan
I feel that!
Dylan i really enjoy your videos, your logic and humor makes total sense for me, would love this type of analysis or styles on the diferent techniques these and other astrophotographers use to help others, I mean some of these you mentioned are really for more enjoyable depending how advaced your technique and experience is as an astrophotographer, for instance astroed or astroblender are some of the most helpful guys in RUclips, and well sometimes you too :)
Exactly, some people just don't get it. Great video!
What a great video! This is a scientific style of photography but you've shown that there is a ton of room for artistic freedom!
Perfectly put... Pretty pictures is the gateway drug to the science. I like it.
Never pass up an opportunity to flex with your flawless guiding graphs, Dylan!
Wow, this installment should be "Astro Imaging Video of the Day" :) Definitely in your top 10!
Thanks!
I think I just learnt more about astrophotography in the last 15min than in the last couple years. Great overview!
Thanks mate!
Dylan, this is a great overview of different AP style. These are resources I’ll refer to repeatedly!
Dylan seems a little bit jealous of chucks play button🤣😂
Totes! I want to be a real RUclipsr! 😂
I keep it under my pillow when I sleep. 😁😁
Who else became an amateur astrophotographer thanks to Trevor?
I knew my bank account was going to get hurt as soon as I saw his videos haha
Excellent selection and analysis
I worked in a lab. Despite written procedures every operative would manage to do the same job a different way, perhaps the various tasks in a different order. But the results could be replicated exactly by another operative.
Astro images will vary, subjectively the image is presented differently, but objectively it's the same data. Until we start taking quantitative measurements of the data e.g. spectrometry, they're mostly pretty pictures.
Great video Dylan!
Everybody brings something to the table.
And that's really cool.
I liked this style video about our astro friends!
Wow. You really stepped it up on this one, Dylan. Something for all of us who frequent your site! Really, well done, Dylan, well done. I'm beginning to think you are a borderline genius. No joke.
Hey thanks! This was really off the cuff.. maybe being in my office made it seem more professional than my kitchen 😆
Thanks Dylan! I've got even more great photographers to follow now!
It's the mouse maze of operating photochopping pictures. The best results without hitting a wall of disappointment in the maze of filters gets them to what they post. That's the major point of style. I'm sure you know after remembering back looking at the clock seeing how much time has passed and not at the result you want. Now for you it's does the dog approve ;)
I was hoping to see work from Wido from Astroforum.. another of my favorite AP channels
Great work Dylan. You and many of the others whose styles you have highlighted have been quite inspiring to me. I am coming from a long way back in terms of capability at both capturing and processing the data but I see the benchmarks you and the others have set for me to aspire to. We have just bought a place that I think is about Bortle 2 at worst so I will lack excuses that previously were an issue fom my home location presently. I have big plans for a home observatory but that may not be for a year or two! I need to slow down for now and get better with the equipment I have first I think.
Congratulations! And thanks for the kind feedback!
They certainly do Dylan!
One guy one Ice inspace has a very "Luminous, Colourful and SATURATED" style..so much so that I had to wear sunglasses JUST to tone the view down a notch..nearly went blind and seasick just looking at his work..didn't just "catch the eye"..caught the stomach as well!
I think you pretty much hit the nail on the head, Dylan. Science isn't cold and straight-laced, only one way about it. What it describes is beautiful in so many different ways. So, why not depict that beauty as art? Why not make it aesthetically pleasing?
Every artist since time began has his or her own style. I see no reason why an astrophotographer shouldn't have a style, either. One of the most famous of all astrophotographs, the Pillars of Creation was shown in the Hubble palette. That, in and of itself, is a style selected by the people who put the data together!
💯
Huh, no Peach?
Seeing Wager's work compared to the others made it really clear how her work looks almost three-dimensional. Such amazing stuff. Goals...
This video was very inspiring. Very talented Astrophotographers.
Next video: comparing styles Astro sketch artist!
Great video. I've only been doing astrophotography since 2017 or so but have learned one great truth. Good astrophotography is hard work! (And I'm lazy. ;) My style is a hodge-podge of okay images and half-baked targets. I thoroughly enjoy the process of capturing data and enjoying the night sky, but endless hours of computer time is like pulling teeth. Maybe someday...but for now, I'm content tinkering, learning, and watching the masters do it. Cheers.
Awesome stuff! One of my all-time favorite astrophotographers is a fellow country man of yours - David Malin, Siding Spring Anglo-Australian Observatory.
You know what.. I wanted to include him but the website links to his galleries were all broken yesterday.
Well, that just ain't fair. He was a master back in the day.
Don't take me wrong I love all of them but somehow this one feels like best of the latest uploads, defo most meaningful. Has freshly cleaned up desk anything to do with this? Cheers!
That's interesting thanks.. it's one of the few I didn't plan or script at all.. I just opened the tabs for the 11 people and went on a rant .. maybe I should do it more often haha.
Great video, I follow some of the people you mentioned and look forward to checking out the many others I was not aware of.
Thanks Gaby!
Really good video, and I follow them all. Shout out to astrobackyard for being the reason I got into deep-sky astro!
Great Video. Lots of inspiration and aspirational astrophotographers.
Thanks Ben!
Hi there. What would then be the True releflection of the the Nebula, Clusters, Gasses etc be. Is there a "reference" to which one can refer to, to see what the actual colours are. What guide can one use to set one's pictures that is taken. This of course not to make the picture taken look way out there, but rather to be close to the True represenation of the object. Thanx
I think my latest video is a good guide. SkyGuides visual filter.
Dylannn!! Glad you're doing well my friend. My style is simple. Yell at my rig until the star trails are manageable, and try to get an HFR that doesn't get me laughed out of the community while using makeup to cover up dust motes that my crappy flat frames didn't fix like a thirsty IG thot.
Haha a well travelled path trust me .. I've been there.. and still am sometimes.
Good comparison Dylan and I like your analysis of each style. After seeing this I think I tend to lean towards towards the extreme end of saturation but hopefully not over board. I like your little ending with PI vs. PS. I do pretty much the same thing. - Cheers Kurt
Most people do .. which is why that rant on the PI FAQ page is a little weird.
@@DylanODonnell Keep on ranting!
Hello! I'm invitied to come in a tv program in Albania(where I live) and one of the questions they'll be asking is who or what show/books would you recommend to the public who are interested in astronomy, and since you were a big help for me and my astrophotography journey I want to ask you, can I recommend you and your channel in TV? I tried reaching you on Instagram but had no success so I had to let you know somehow.
This astrophotography channel along with a few others should have a damn national geographic or Discovery Channel show
Great video Dylan. Thanks for showing me I can't do. Now I can go back to my observatory where no one can see me and cry into my drink/coffee awhile.
Thankfully, it's not a competition. You can probably already take a better photo of space than 99.999% of the population if it was though :)
Today you covered something I have been struggling with. If you were to take a picture of a lightbulb with a certain spectrum, say 6500 kelvin, then do the same thing using the filters you use for deep space photography, when processed, stacked and no correction, the two results are different and in my tries, the filtered are brownish.
I will be the first to say, I don’t have the experience you do, another way of saying I don’t know what I am doing, and with this I have a question or two. Have you tried color correction to be accurate? Or, is it always just to be artistic to what you like.
Don’t get me wrong, it was the Astrophotography that got me interested back in the ‘70s. But I couldn’t really afford any good equipment until recently. I just want to see accurate or know what accurately recording data is to make decisions I won’t have questions on later.
A good anchor for what’s “right” are two things - the star colour and the background of space. If you’re shooting RGB colour and then tune the colour balance until the dark areas or voids of space are black/dark grey with no bias in r g or b AND the stars are blue / orange .. then the colours are “true”. Everything from there (saturation, shifting into purple etc) is all fiction.
@@DylanODonnell thanks. I was concentrating on just the nebula and I should have considered the stars.
Thanks for making this video! Very inspiring 👍
This video so needed to be a minute or 2 longer, you could have mentioned me too then :) I mean I do have an APOD after all 👍
Congratulations :)
@@DylanODonnell thanks man. Keep up the great work, love watching your channel
I love your Background lol
Great comparison Dylan!
Ray! What’ve you been up to? I miss seeing your videos, too. Hope you’ve been well down in Texas. If I was down there, I’d try to hit a SpaceX launch sometime. Some day . . . .
@@HockeyHomeBrewski Hi Joe! Thanks for asking. Posting will start soon
You wouldn't want to miss people like Fabian Neyer and Ivan Eder
Happy to see that you featured Thierry Legault, our national pride!
He's amazing!
Just a fun little comment for any budding camera people: Never put the subject in a swivel chair, because 100% of the time they WILL swivel, as Dylan does in closing section. Did I mention 100% of the time...also their feet MUST touch the floor or the will swing like a little kid does.
Nice overview of some of these astro people. The one thing that stands out: Look at what us amateurs with just a few thousand dollars worth of gear can do. Sure some have an easy $10K invested, but compare that to what one would have needed to spend 20-30 years ago. I am about $2K in, and probably looking to add another level, so $2-3K more, and the mind blows on what can be created.
I have seen images that rival anything prior to Hubble. Now if the clouds and smoke would only cooperate more often, as I have to drive about an hour, so my sessions have been few and far between lately. Planetary camera (ASI224) coming this week, so hoping to get some Jupiter and Saturn happening through my classic circa '78 Celestron, C-8, the one that really started things moving for amateurs, IMHO. - Cheers
They're all great, but....... Where did you get that awesome Pluto print? I need one of those. Definitely my favourite PLANET.
I know right! It's huge... I printed it for a Star Stuff event and it's the one thing I couldn't give away. The resolution is nuts up close. Even at that size I can't see any pixels... just detail.
@@DylanODonnell If you ever change your mind, I will give it a good home 😉
Thanks to trurning me on to Thierry, that's some cool shi$t!
His work is really bonkers!
Ahh Yes!!! The famous "Gate Way Drug"... 🤣
Thanks for doing this!