Jump to content

Astrophotography, Vía Lactea


Recommended Posts

This picture was created with 6 photos at 20s, ISO4000, F/2.0 with the Fuji x-pro1 and Samyang 12mm. I used Photoshop for align the 6 photos. The converted it to smart objet and use the stack option called "median".  By doing the mean or median, you are separating the signal to the noise. If the relation between boh is bigger enogh, you can see more details in the nebulae in the astrophoto.

Ps 4000 Edit


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...

That's the "used Photoshop for align the 6 photos" part. In astrophotography image processing is at least half the work. You can't do wonders if the original images are bad, but even if they're as good there's still tons of processing to do before you end up with a great picture of the milky way or other astronomical objects.


I posted this list in an earlier topic, but I guess it might be useful here as well:

Despite the topic, this isn't really X-T1 specific thread. Might be useful to move this to more appropriate area. Although I'm not sure which one that would be.


There's really no magical way to get rid of the noise. Increasing the exposure time and stacking exposures will help in getting rid most of it. Noise reduction algorithms will always remove some of the dimmer stars, but usually isn't really a problem since those faint stars wouldn't be visible in the final image anyway.


I doubt anyone here can give you better advice than what can be found from a number of different online tutorials, such as (these are in some kind of order, just don't ask me what it is):




http://www.astro-imaging.com/Tutorial/PixInsight/M33/en.html (processing tutorial)

https://www.reddit.com/r/astrophotography/comments/2acnqb/the_great_list_of_astrophotography_software/ (software list)







Few other useful links:



http://www.blue-marble.de/nightlights/2012 (and the rest of the blue marble site)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • Its a little more than just the metadata - there is also a 13MP jpg stored in the RAF file - if the RAF file was to be updated I'd probably prefer another copy.
    • Have you tried using the Fujifilm X Raw Studio software on a computer? You can still use the camera for the actual conversion and it would solve most of your problems in naming and batch conversion.
    • Hello. If I shot in "Velvia", but decide later that "Provia" would have been better, why can't the camera switch the "Velvia" setting to "Provia" in the RAW file? It is just a setting within the RAW file. Overwriting the original parameters is easier for me because I don't have to bother with additional files on a computer. Just let me save those parameters. The image won't be altered, just the parameters used later by the converter to generate the image. For me that would make sense. I don't want to lose my time because I have to boot a computer where some software is running. It could be done within seconds in the camera.
    • I have owned several X100 models most recently the x100v and also the Leica Q2 and Q3.  In my opinion as a 20+ year enthusiast the comparison is apples and oranges.  Both systems have their strengths.  If you love the Fujifilm system or are mainly a jpeg shooter, the x100vi is the one to buy.  When I initially purchased the Q2, I quickly realized that this was intended for post processing.  The jpegs were acceptable but not as robust as Fuji.  The Q3 is solidly built with simple controls, tilt screen, an intuitive menu system, Summilux 28mm lens, 61 megapixels, weatherproof, IBIS, improved low light performance and dynamic range.  If the Q3 is within you budget, my suggestion would be to try (or purchase)  both and decide what fits your needs and style.  
    • Your last point does not make a lot of sense. It is similar to saying ‘take a raw file, run it through LightRoom or whichever raw convertor you are using to find a neat version but then overwrite the saved parameters in the original raw file instead of saving the new version as a separate image.’ Raw files store the image as shot. Using what you are suggesting, if someone needs to go back to the original ‘as shot’ image, it would be impossible.
  • Create New...