I shot over 3600 one-second exposures to get my sharpest image of a galaxy to dateSubmitted by J3RRYLIKESCHEESE t3_11cfm8b in space
Total-Oil2289 t1_ja7api5 wrote
Reply to comment by KingRandomGuy in I shot over 3600 one-second exposures to get my sharpest image of a galaxy to date by J3RRYLIKESCHEESE
What's the difference between this and so-called "lucky imaging" where my understanding is that you're taking lots of short exposures and keeping the ones that are least affected by atmospheric turbulence? Is it just the same solution for different problems?
KingRandomGuy t1_ja82qp1 wrote
It's a similar solution to lucky imaging, but lucky imaging specifically requires that your exposures are short. You can still stack very long exposures for deep sky objects and get a great result (assuming you are tracking).
The concept is similar though; in both cases you are stacking to increase the signal to noise ratio, and you should throw out bad frames.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments