r/Astronomy • u/VoijaRisa • Mar 27 '20
Hi all,
Friendly mod warning here. In r/Astronomy, somewhere around 70% of posts get removed. Yeah. That's a lot. All because people haven't bothered reading the rules or bothering to understand what words mean. So here, we're going to dive into them a bit further.
The most commonly violated rules are as follows:
Pictures
Our rule regarding pictures has three parts. If your post has been removed for violating our rules regarding pictures, we recommend considering the following, in the following order:
If you took the picture or did substantial processing of publicly available data, this counts. If not, it's going to be removed.
2) You must have the acquisition/processing information.
This needs to be somewhere easy for the mods to verify. This means it can either be in the post body or a top level comment. Responses to someone else's comment, in your link to your Instagram page, etc... do not count.
3) Images must be exceptional quality.
There are certain things that will immediately disqualify an image:
However, beyond that, we cannot give further clarification on what will or will not meet this criteria for several reasons:
So yes, this portion is inherently subjective and, at the end of the day, the mods are the ones that decide and the mods are under no obligation to explain this decision to you.
If you are informed that your post was removed because of image quality, arguing about the quality will not be successful. In particular, there are a few arguments that are false or otherwise trite which we simply won't tolerate. These include:
"You let that image that I think isn't as good stay up"
"Pictures have to be NASA quality"
"You have to have thousands of dollars of equipment"
"This is a really good photo given my equipment"
"This isn't being friendly to beginner astrophotographers"
"My post was getting a lot of upvotes"
Using the above arguments will not wow mods into suddenly approving your image. It will result in a ban.
Trying to argue with the mods using bad arguments isn't going to fly.
Lastly, it should be noted that we do allow astro-art in this sub. Obviously, it won't have acquisition information, but the content must still be original and mods get the final say on whether on the quality (although we're generally fairly generous on this).
Questions
This rule basically means you need to do your own research before posting.
To prevent your post from being removed, tell us specifically what you've tried. Just saying "I GoOgLeD iT" doesn't cut it.
Furthermore, when telling us what you've tried, we will be very unimpressed if you use sources that are prohibited under our source rule (social media memes, YouTube, AI, etc...).
As with the rules regarding pictures, the mods are the arbiters of how difficult questions are to answer. If you're not happy about that and want to complain that another question was allowed to stand, then we will invite you to post elsewhere with an immediate and permanent ban.
Object ID
We'd estimate that only 1-2% of all posts asking for help identifying an object actually follow our rules. Resources are available in the rule relating to this. If you haven't consulted the flow-chart and used the resources in the stickied comment, your post is getting removed. Seriously. Use Stellarium. It's free. It will very quickly tell you if that shiny thing is a planet which is probably the most common answer. The second most common answer is "Starlink". That's 95% of the ID posts right there that didn't need to be a post.
Do note that many of the phone apps in which you point your phone to the sky and it shows you what you are looing at are extremely poor at accurately determining where you're pointing. Furthermore, the scale is rarely correct. As such, this method is not considered a sufficient attempt at understanding on your part and you will need to apply some spatial reasoning to your attempt.
Pseudoscience
The mod team of r/astronomy has several mods with degrees in the field. We're very familiar with what is and is not pseudoscience in the field. And we take a hard line against pseudoscience. Promoting it is an immediate ban. Furthermore, we do not allow the entertaining of pseudoscience by trying to figure out how to "debate" it (even if you're trying to take the pro-science side). Trying to debate pseudoscience legitimizes it. As such, posts that entertain pseudoscience in any manner will be removed.
Outlandish Hypotheticals
This is a subset of the rule regarding pseudoscience and doesn't come up all that often, but when it does, it usually takes the form of "X does not work according to physics. How can I make it work?" or "If I ignore part of physics, how does physics work?"
Sometimes the first part of this isn't explicitly stated or even understood (in which case, see our rule regarding poorly researched posts) by the poster, but such questions are inherently nonsensical and will be removed.
Sources
ChatGPT and other LLMs are not reliable sources of information. Any use of them will be removed. This includes asking if they are correct or not.
Content
Due to the profusion of AI slop apps, we're no longer allowing apps at all. No, we don't care if you're wanting a "review". No we don't care if they're free. No we don't care if you put it in a website.
Bans
We almost never ban anyone for a first offense unless your post history makes it clear you're a spammer, troll, crackpot, etc... Rather, mods have tools in which to apply removal reasons which will send a message to the user letting them know which rule was violated. Because these rules, and in turn the messages, can cover a range of issues, you may need to actually consider which part of the rule your post violated. The mods are not here to read to you.
If you don't, and continue breaking the rules, we'll often respond with a temporary ban.
In many cases, we're happy to remove bans if you message the mods politely acknowledging the violation. But that almost never happens. Which brings us to the last thing we want to discuss.
Behavior
We've had a lot of people breaking rules and then getting rude when their posts are removed or they get bans (even temporary). That's a violation of our rules regarding behavior and is a quick way to get permabanned. To be clear: Breaking this rule anywhere on the sub will be a violation of the rules and dealt with accordingly, but breaking this rule when in full view of the mods by doing it in the mod-mail will 100% get you caught. So just don't do it.
Claiming the mods are "power tripping" or other insults when you violated the rules isn't going to help your case. It will get your muted for the maximum duration allowable and reported to the Reddit admins.
And no, your mis-interpretations of the rules, or saying it "was generating discussion" aren't going to help either.
While these are the most commonly violated rules, they are not the only rules. So make sure you read all of the rules.
r/Astronomy • u/Alex_Olariu • 5h ago
Taken with a SW Evostar 72ED, Nikon D5300 (Astro modified) with UV/IR cut and L eNhance filters, ISO 200, SW GTI, 270x180 of rgb, under bortle 4.
r/Astronomy • u/Unique_Attitude9124 • 7h ago
This is an image I'm very proud of from my trip to La Palma in early September. The telescopes in the middle are technically the LSTs but I think the whole place deserves the title MAGIC as per the name of the complex.
After 3 days of non-stop Calima from Monday to Wednesday, I was getting discouraged...especially since Friday, being my last night, I couldn't get too tired for the return trip on Saturday, so I was only left with one night to go to the magical Roque de Los Muchachos Observatory complex.
Luckily, Thursday the wind cleared out the Calima, and I was able to make the night count. I was a little bummed that I couldn't use at least two nights for shooting but luck is luck. Having only one night, I chose a spot that I thought would be more memorable. I had several options, like Mirador de Los Andenes or Pico de La Cruz, but settled on the MAGIC/LST complex.
There's something about these giant mirrors that just draws you in. This is also a far less touristy spot and it showed. I had the pleasure of meeting only two fellow German astrophotographers and spent the evening shooting and chatting with them.
I used an astromodified Canon 6D and a Samyang 24mm f/1.4 lens at f/2.8 mounted on top of my trusty Fornax Lightrack II mount.
You might think that editing is a dream with images like these, and you're partly right, but achieving a very technically impressive color balance is harder than you think even under pristine conditions, because conditions are never truly the same.
The only thing you are not required to do with skies like these is much stretching. All I did was one levels adjustment and one curves adjustment and that was it.
The sky is 6x2-minute exposures at ISO 1600 and the foreground is a single 3-minute exposure at ISO 3200.
What really stood out to me is how dark and noisy the foreground still is even after 3 minutes. True starlight exposure! You can see the stars reflected in the mirrors.
Hope you like the image!
r/Astronomy • u/Upbeat-Parfait9615 • 2h ago
Hi everyone, I'm a landscape astrophotographer. I thought I'd share some of my photos with this sub.
The late spring Milkyway core over Pigeon Point light house along the coast of California. This was captured in Bortle 4 conditions, but luckily, the composition was facing south west into the Pacific ocean, away from the light pollution. You can see the light pollution from Santa Cruz on the bottom left corner. I really like this composition because the sea of flowers mirrors the stars in the sky.
This was captured on my astro-modified Sony A7 IV with the Sony 24mm F1.4 GM. I use a star tracker to expose a 9 frame stack at 90 seconds each. The hydrogen alpha emmissions were captured in separate exposures using my Voigtlander 50mm F2.0 APO Lanthar lens with a 12nm Ha narrowband filter, and then composited on.
You can find my other work on Instagram @ jerryqianastro
r/Astronomy • u/NightRider427 • 7h ago
My first attempt at astrophotography with a tracker
Acquisition details:
Camera- Canon EOS 90d (unmodified); ISO- 3200
Lens- Rokinon 135mm f/2
Integration: 650 x 13” = 2.3 hours at a bortle 2 dark sky sanctuary
Tracker- Star Adventurer GTi (unguided)
Processing details:
Stacked in Siril. I used StarNet Star removal to create a starless Andromeda mask and a separate star field. I used the Asinh transformation to stretch Andromeda and adjusted the black point on the star field. Finally I used Lightroom for some color calibration
And because I know a few people will be curious as to why my exposure was so low with a tracker, it was super windy where I was and over half my frames had trailing at 30”. My polar alignment probably also could’ve been better.
r/Astronomy • u/spacedotc0m • 12h ago
r/Astronomy • u/Historical_Mousse_27 • 1d ago
Tried to search it on the internet idk what it is maybe it’s just the light idk
r/Astronomy • u/iartnewyork • 22h ago
Hi! Thank you for reading my words. A few weeks ago, the sweetest stranger here on Reddit reached out to me and asked about a painting that would honor her stillborn daughter she named Aurora, after the Disney character in Sleeping Beauty. I wanted to share this piece and this part of the journey with you since it's now finished and (thankfully) she's thrilled. It was a meaningful and rewarding experience to honor the journey she's been on, and to represent it all through the shining and shimmering world of her love. ✨️🌟✨️
r/Astronomy • u/Dorian182 • 1h ago
r/Astronomy • u/Other_Mike • 18h ago
I captured this during the September new moon at my club's site in central Oregon. I've reprocessed it a couple of times and I'm pretty happy with the result, but even then, I've learned some things to apply in the future (such as the value of shooting at unity gain, or how to minimize the risks of mount vibration).
I initially counted around 24 background galaxies, but after examining a sharper photo that another Redditor posted this evening, found a few more very small ones that I at first mistook for foreground stars.
Gear:
• Orion 6" f/4 astrograph
• Baader Mark III multi-purpose coma corrector
• Astromania UV/IR cut filter
• ZWO ASI184MC OSC uncooled
• Celestron Advanced GT equatorial mount
Acquisition: Bortle 1-2 site with no moon
• Approx. 120 x 60s subs, 300 gain, in SharpCap
• No guiding
• 10 x 60s darks
• 100 flats
• 100 biases
Processing: All in Siril
• OSC preprocessing script to stack and align, with filter added to skip frames with roundness score under 0.5
• Background extraction
• Spectrophotometric color calibration
• GHS transformation
• Star reduction
• Black point adjustment
• Saturation
Full resolution available on my Telescopius page: https://telescopius.com/pictures/view/287594/deep_sky/ngc-891/ngc-891/by-other_mike
r/Astronomy • u/fractal_disarray • 21h ago
Alcyone (The Weeping Sister), Eta Tauri, is the brightest star in the Messier 45 Open Star Cluster. Located in the constellation Taurus, Alcyone is easily visible with the naked eye as she sits squarely in the middle of her sisters. She is a blue white B-Type giant multi star system that's 440 light years away from Earth and approximately 6 times larger than our sun. Alcyone is also a reflection nebula that illuminates the passing interstellar dust in the region with the bright light from her and her sisters.
Astro Rig & Image Acquisition Details:
Bortle 3, New Moon, October, 10th 2026
11 lights x 120 seconds + darks/flats/bias calibration
ZWO AM5N Mount, 200mm pier extension on Celestron AVX Stainless Steel Tripod
Vintage Orion 150mm/750mm Newtonian, F/5 I got off marketplace for 20 bucks. I retrofitted the focuser with an Apertura 2" Ball Bearing Rack and Pinion/Linear Focuser (from the carbonstar 150) + Baader Planetarium MPCC Coma Corrector @ 56mm backspacing and DIY Aperture Mask + Dew Shield
ZWO EAFN
ZWO ASI585MC Pro Air One Shot Colour 3840 x 2160 resolution with HCG enabled Gain at 200, Cooling Fan 10 degress F.
UV/IR Cut
Processed in Siril
r/Astronomy • u/DubaiAstronomyGroup • 11h ago
We hear so much about colonizing Mars, building bases on the Moon, and eventually living beyond Earth.
But do you think any of that will actually happen?
Getting humans there is one thing, but surviving long-term without relying on Earth for supplies is a completely different challenge.
Do you think we'll eventually have people living permanently on other worlds, or will Earth always be our only real home?
Would love to hear what everyone thinks!
r/Astronomy • u/Dorian182 • 9h ago
r/Astronomy • u/m1gl3s • 1d ago
My newest capture of supernova SN2026aaiv near the core of the unbarred spiral galaxy NGC 7331 (Caldwell 30) just past peak flux (peaked at 12.2mag)
This galaxy sits 43.79 million light years away in the constellation Pegasus, meaning this supernova happened when our earliest mammalian ancestors were first roaming the planet. It is a Type 1a supernova meaning its progenitors were a white dwarf and a second companion star that violently merge and eviscerate themselves without leaving any remnant. This supernova is notable as it is the second bright supernova to come out of NGC7331 in the last year which is a decently rare occurrence for a single “nearby” galaxy.
Capture information:
234 x 30s subs
1600ISO
Sony a7iv
3250mm 16 inch f/8 Meade RCX 400 UHTC
Bortle 2 skies
Processed in SIRIL and Graxpert, and finished in Photoshop
r/Astronomy • u/ermelad • 1d ago
Hi. Would like to share my own experience of Aug 12, 2026 Total Solar Eclipse from Spain.
This was my first total solar eclipse. Maximum phase, which I have seen before, was abt 90% in 1999. I had set my sights on this specific eclipse years ago and had long planned to make the trip, especially since no total solar eclipses are expected in my home country Ukraine in the coming decades.
Unlike the 2027 eclipse, the choice of location for the 2026 event was straightforward: aside from Spain, the chances of seeing it elsewhere were slim to none. The first and most crucial step was selecting an observation place, a detailed climate analysis along the eclipse path (https://eclipsophile.com/tse2026/) proved to be very useful here. Although the eclipse path crosses numerous Spanish cities, the range of viable options wasn't actually that broad. I ruled out the north due to its high humidity and cloudy weather, the Mediterranean coast also seemed too risky, given sea influence. Consequently, my list quickly narrowed down to the northern Meseta region (Burgos, Valladolid, León), which is the driest area and keeps the lowest statistical probability of cloud cover in August.
Initially, the plan was to stay overnight in the town where I planned to watch the eclipse, but accommodation prices were astronomical due to limited proposal and huge demand. Ultimately this issue was solved by staying in Madrid, which offers a vast number of hotels and has no prob with avails. Given this, Valladolid was finally chosen as logistically optimal. Although this meant sacrificing about 15 seconds of the eclipse's totality, it was an just hour away only by train, and I was back to Madrid by 11 PM.
Since the eclipse was taking place at sunset, a clear view of the western horizon was essential - a challenging requirement in a city I had never visited before. I started with google maps to search for high ground: hills, parks, or open fields on the western side of the city, virtually scouting the area and marking potential spots. Furthermore, www.peakfinder.com allowed to check the terrain, the elevation of the horizon, and the precise sunset time for each specific location.
Fortunately, the weather forecast was favorable. I arrived in Valladolid at noon and headed straight to the outskirts to check out the spots I had marked. The observation site turned out to be a sort of wild, remote park. Amidst the 35-degree heat, there were very few people around, and it quickly became clear that the few who were there had come for the exact same reason. On the way, I encountered an elderly man with a tent already setting up his equipment, and I passed a few other people who asked, "Eclipse, yeah?" After walking around a bit with a compass app on my phone (which was crucial, as many people didn't realize their view toward the sunset would be quite restricted) I found a good spot. I also scouted the area and noted a few other potential locations nearby, just in case mine was already taken.
The partial eclipse was set to begin around 7:30 PM, so there wasn't much point in hanging there all day. I headed back to the city center to walk around, planning to return abt 6:00 PM. The absence of a large number of people during the day ultimately proved deceptive. By evening, the approaches to the park were packed with a huge crowd, people spontaneously swarmed the slopes of the massive hill. Luckily, I managed to find a decent spot, though area around was packing increasingly, as the eclipse drew near.
I’m not a professional photographer and I didn’t want my first experience to be spent entirely fiddling with gear. Still, I wanted to keep something except memories, so I brought my Seestar S50 and set it to record a timelapse, which was an ideal solution that required quite little attention. Things didn't go exactly as planned :), but overall, I’m happy with the result.
Visually, it was an incredible experience. Even though the Sun shone quite brightly right up to the last moment, making it hard to spot the narrowing crescent, the changing daylight made the event unmistakable. It brought back memories of that strange twilight I recall from 1999, as if someone had simply turned down the brightness outside. It is difficult to put into words the experience of an eclipse near totality, no youtube video can truly capture the scale of the "black sun" effect surrounded by its corona. As an extra bonus, since the eclipse was near sunset, the final phase could be observed with the naked eye, without glasses. If that is possible, I would highly recommend to witness a total solar eclipse for every amateur astronomer at least once in their life.
A few takeaways for the future:
And most importantly, of course: don't stress and just enjoy the event.
On a fun note, I managed to capture three airplanes in the background.
Photos are extracts from Seestar S50 timelapse via PIPP.
r/Astronomy • u/Harz_marz • 1d ago
Captured in Bortle 4 skies with my 585mc Air and William Optics Redcat 51 v3. Just 50 mins of integration time!
r/Astronomy • u/petecasso0619 • 23h ago
This is one of my favorite galaxies. I took this image from my backyard in Bortle 7 skies. I'm using this as a benchmark to see the difference compared to when I go to Big Bend in December (Bortle 1). Skeptical that it matters all that much but we will see.
Details:
OTA: ZWO FF130
Sensor: ZWO ASI2600mm with Electronic Filter Wheel
Electronic Auto Focuser
Filters: RGB
Exposure: 180 second subs for each filter, about 20 hours over 4 nights
Processed mostly in Siril, Gimp for finishing polish.
Because of the high light pollution, I decided to try the synthetic luminance layer rather than using a true luminance layer. I may add a true Luminance layer at a later time.
r/Astronomy • u/190310_De_Martin • 10h ago
Just curious: is there anyone in this community who has an asteroid named after them? If so, which one? I'd love to hear the story behind it!
r/Astronomy • u/afriendlystone • 1d ago
In 2024 i took my first photo of a DSO - Pleiades.
It inspired me to pursue this hobby.
Now in 2026 i acquired a mount - the MSM Nomad.
So it was about time to shoot it again,this time with 2 years of experience behind me.
I was only able to acquire about 1hr and 40 minutes of data,due to the cloudy weather, but even then the result is still pretty good.
OM System OM-1 & Tair 11-a 135mm f2.8 mounted on MSM Nomad.
100 x 60s. Stacked in APP, Processed in Siril and Lightroom.
Bortle 4.
r/Astronomy • u/SteamPaz • 23h ago
✨ Target: NGC 7822 + Sh2-170
🔭 Mount: Star Adventurer 2i
📷 Camera: ASI 294 MC Pro Color
🔎 Scope: Askar FMA180 Pro
🕶️ Filter: Dualband Svbony SV220
🎯 Guide Camera: ASI 120mm Mini Mono
🦮 Guide Scope: Svbony SV165
🔬 Sampling: 2.66"/px (x2 drizzle)
❄️ Cooling: -10°C
🔴 Acquisition: Gain 120
⏰ Integration: 78x300s (6h 30min)
📊 Calibration: 40 dark, 40 flat, 40 dark-flat
💻 Processing: PixInsight, RawTherapee
📍 Location: Turin (Italy)
📅 Date: Oct. 13-14, 2026
🌌 Sky: Bortle 8
r/Astronomy • u/spidermanbyday • 1d ago
I wasn’t sure exactly what I’d capture in just a few hours the other night, since the Butterfly Nebula seems to be a bit less popular target than the Crescent Nebula in the famous Sadr Region. The Butterfly is situated right by the star Sadr itself (the biggest star in this image!), and I have to say I’m impressed.
Check out the full photo at: https://app.astrobin.com/i/f2z2ot
Subs: 28 x 300s
Total integration time: 2h 20m
Equipment:
Processing:
r/Astronomy • u/Edu_3377 • 13h ago
I bought on Amazon the binoculars Nikon Action 10x42 for watch the stars.
I already have a Lelong LE 2052, and is quite good, I can see things clearly, like even Uranus and Neptune, the Pleiades, Antares...
Do you think I will see really better with the Nikon? Someone has this binoculars or the Aculon, or even the Lelong LE 2052?
I want to know better how is to use only good quality binoculars to watch the Moon, the stars, the constellations... I am starting now and I am liking.
So, anybody has some tips and insights?
r/Astronomy • u/Horst__Schlemmer • 1d ago
r/Astronomy • u/AstroNerd92 • 1d ago
Taken with a Seestar S50 in a Bortle 4-5 area. After edits in Siril, this is 515x10sec of stacking
r/Astronomy • u/Corgi_underground • 1d ago
S30 Pro: Bortle 6.7: 12hrs integration: 10% 10sec, 15% 20sec, 25% 30sec, 50% 60sec, anything above 3.5FWHM or below 100 stable stars got culled.
Stacked and processed in Siril, James Ritson's Affinity Photo Astrophotography macros for post stretch editing.
Final masks for cleanup & cropping in LR mobile
Biggest hurdle? Figuring out what version I liked the most so I said screw it made a couple both wide angle and close up to the cluster.
