scroll down to the imaging sections. These people ( most of them ) are just regular fuckos like me and you. Difference being they have expensive telescopes and CCD cameras. Been an astronomer all my life ( mid 40s ), owned telescopes since I was a kid.
Go to the site. Have a look through. Just tell me WHY. WHY would "they" put that much shit out there as fake? If space was fake boys, we wouldn't be discovering new galaxies every day.
You can follow almost real time novas in other galaxies. These folks are most of the ones actually discovering these novas, by pure accident - just happen to be imaging M51 that night, and a super nova occurred in that galaxy. These novas are then tracked DAILY by thousands of amateur astronomers who, DAILY post their images. You can literally watch a super nova grow and then dim through it's entire process.
All done by regular folks, who work regular jobs. Page isn't NASA / government funded, it's privately owned by the admins and funded by the members of the site ; all just regular folks.
Categories for things in space:
Messier, New General Category, Abel, Caldwell, Index Catalogue. Each one of these has hundreds of objects in them.
This is only one website / forum for astro photography. Go ahead and put that into google and see how many astro forums there actually are. There are over 7 million amateur astronomers in USA ALONE. Amateur astronomer is anyone who owns a scope and regularly uses it, and doesn't teach astro stuff in a school or work for NASA.
How and WHY would they fake that many things: nebula, novas, galaxies, clusters, neutron stars, dwarf stars, wolf rayett stars, dark nebulae, merging galaxies, just to name a few. WHY.
You realize these space fags spend countless hours in Photoshop to make their photos look like NASA images right? Aww the raw images look not even close to the finished product. Also may I clarify this post was directed towards the space agencies. No shit tons of people take pictures from earth of the sky. Do they edit the shit out of most of the photos they take? Yes.
AMATEUR SPACE QUEERS MOST EDIT THEIR SHIT FAGGOT.
-"changed the camera settings and turned on the move shoot move sky tracker, shooting 90 shots at 90 seconds each, f3.2 and iso400.
I then stacked the lights with darks on deep sky stacker and and edited the sky photo separately from the foreground before blending in photoshop using layer masks. I then touched up the final in lightroom"
-"I over edited this to try and create another world feeling"
-"Stitched in PtGui Pro, Edited in PixInsight, Lr and Ps for final touches."
-"I really struggle with editing Andromeda....
Canon 5d mk4, Canon 100-400 f5.6, SA Tracker
70 lights - Iso 400, 800, 1600, 3200. I also used Darks & Bias frames, just don't remember off hand how many. Edited in Deep sky stacker, Lightroom, AstroPanel, PS. CC PLEASE"
-"A re-edited shot from July last year, taken in the beautiful Elan Valley."
-"I stacked the images in Sequator and edited the stacked master in Photoshop. I did a long exposure foreground but the moonlight was too extreme to use it."
-"Struggling with editing night shots at present, any help appreciated."
-"I re edited my image I posted earlier... which do you like better and what advice would you give to improve?"
-"Question...should all Milky Way photos be edited to look the same?"
-"I still have to improve on my editing but these are latest photos of the Milky Way."
-"Can anybody recommend any photo editing software? Photoshop plugins or alternatives to photoshop?"
Oh.. real pictures of space don't exist you say?
www.cloudynights.com
scroll down to the imaging sections. These people ( most of them ) are just regular fuckos like me and you. Difference being they have expensive telescopes and CCD cameras. Been an astronomer all my life ( mid 40s ), owned telescopes since I was a kid.
Go to the site. Have a look through. Just tell me WHY. WHY would "they" put that much shit out there as fake? If space was fake boys, we wouldn't be discovering new galaxies every day.
You can follow almost real time novas in other galaxies. These folks are most of the ones actually discovering these novas, by pure accident - just happen to be imaging M51 that night, and a super nova occurred in that galaxy. These novas are then tracked DAILY by thousands of amateur astronomers who, DAILY post their images. You can literally watch a super nova grow and then dim through it's entire process.
All done by regular folks, who work regular jobs. Page isn't NASA / government funded, it's privately owned by the admins and funded by the members of the site ; all just regular folks.
Categories for things in space: Messier, New General Category, Abel, Caldwell, Index Catalogue. Each one of these has hundreds of objects in them.
This is only one website / forum for astro photography. Go ahead and put that into google and see how many astro forums there actually are. There are over 7 million amateur astronomers in USA ALONE. Amateur astronomer is anyone who owns a scope and regularly uses it, and doesn't teach astro stuff in a school or work for NASA.
How and WHY would they fake that many things: nebula, novas, galaxies, clusters, neutron stars, dwarf stars, wolf rayett stars, dark nebulae, merging galaxies, just to name a few. WHY.
You realize these space fags spend countless hours in Photoshop to make their photos look like NASA images right? Aww the raw images look not even close to the finished product. Also may I clarify this post was directed towards the space agencies. No shit tons of people take pictures from earth of the sky. Do they edit the shit out of most of the photos they take? Yes.
Do you even know what you're talking about? Sadly, not even close.
Do you have ANY idea what actual LITTLE processing is done in amateur astrophotgraphy? Nope, you don't, obviously.
And, just for your information, NASA doesn't process most of their images, they release the data to the public. ANYONE can process the data.
And yes, bub, there ARE that many people doing it. Go to the site, open your fucking eyes and actually see it for yourself.
'Educating' yourself from YouTube? Imagine....
AMATEUR SPACE QUEERS MOST EDIT THEIR SHIT FAGGOT. -"changed the camera settings and turned on the move shoot move sky tracker, shooting 90 shots at 90 seconds each, f3.2 and iso400. I then stacked the lights with darks on deep sky stacker and and edited the sky photo separately from the foreground before blending in photoshop using layer masks. I then touched up the final in lightroom" -"I over edited this to try and create another world feeling" -"Stitched in PtGui Pro, Edited in PixInsight, Lr and Ps for final touches." -"I really struggle with editing Andromeda.... Canon 5d mk4, Canon 100-400 f5.6, SA Tracker 70 lights - Iso 400, 800, 1600, 3200. I also used Darks & Bias frames, just don't remember off hand how many. Edited in Deep sky stacker, Lightroom, AstroPanel, PS. CC PLEASE" -"A re-edited shot from July last year, taken in the beautiful Elan Valley." -"I stacked the images in Sequator and edited the stacked master in Photoshop. I did a long exposure foreground but the moonlight was too extreme to use it." -"Struggling with editing night shots at present, any help appreciated." -"I re edited my image I posted earlier... which do you like better and what advice would you give to improve?" -"Question...should all Milky Way photos be edited to look the same?" -"I still have to improve on my editing but these are latest photos of the Milky Way." -"Can anybody recommend any photo editing software? Photoshop plugins or alternatives to photoshop?"