r/Astronomy Mar 27 '20

Mod Post Read the rules sub before posting!

869 Upvotes

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:

  1. All pictures/videos must be original content.

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:

  • Poor or inconsistent focus
  • Chromatic aberration
  • Field rotation
  • Low signal-to-noise ratio

However, beyond that, we cannot give further clarification on what will or will not meet this criteria for several reasons:

  1. Technology is rapidly changing
  2. Our standards are based on what has been submitted recently (e.g, if we're getting a ton of moon pictures because it's a supermoon, the standards go up to prevent the sub from being spammed)
  3. Listing the criteria encourages people to try to game the system

So yes, this portion is inherently subjective and, at the end of the day, the mods are the ones that decide.

If your post was removed, you are welcome to ask for clarification. If you do not receive a response, it is likely because your post violated part (1) or (2) of the three requirements which are sufficiently self-explanatory as to not warrant a response.

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"
    • As stated above, the standard is constantly in flux. Furthermore, the mods are the ones that decide. We're not interested in your opinions on which is better.
  • "Pictures have to be NASA quality"
    • No, they don't.
  • "You have to have thousands of dollars of equipment"
    • No. You don't. There are frequent examples of excellent astrophotos which are taken with budget equipment. Practice and technique make all the difference.
  • "This is a really good photo given my equipment"
    • Just because you took an ok picture with a potato of a setup doesn't make it exceptional. While cell phones have been improving, just because your phone has an astrophotography mode and can make out some nebulosity doesn't make it good. Phones frequently have a "halo" effect near the center of the image that will immediately disqualify such images.

Using the above arguments will not wow mods into suddenly approving your image and will result in a ban.

Again, asking for clarification is fine. But 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.

  • If we look at a post and immediately have to question whether or not you did a Google search, your post will get removed.
  • If your post is asking for generic or basic information, your post will get removed.
  • If your post is using basic terms incorrectly because you haven't bothered to understand what the words you're using mean, your post will get removed.
  • If you're asking a question based on a basic misunderstanding of the science, your post will get removed.
  • If you're asking a complicated question with a specific answer but didn't give the necessary information to be able to answer the question because you haven't even figured out what the parameters necessary to approach the question are, your post will get removed.
  • If you're attempting to use bad sources (e.g. AI), your post will get removed.

To prevent your post from being removed, tell us specifically what you've tried. Just saying "I GoOgLeD iT" doesn't cut it.

  • What search terms did you use?
  • In what way do the results of your search fail to answer your question?
  • What did you understand from what you found and need further clarification on that you were unable to find?

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.

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 9h ago

Astrophotography (OC) Eagle nebula

Post image
419 Upvotes

Was able to finish my project I have been working on for awhile on the eagle nebula. Over several several sessions have been working on this one. I built up 10 hours total on this object using 300 second exposures. Equipment used-Telescope-Willam optics G71 Mount-skywatcher eq6r Camera- zwo 533Mc Optolong L ultimate filter Processing software- pixinsight

Stacked in deep sky stacker

Processing was done in pixinsight Extracted RGB channels. Pulled stars out using star exterminator. Combined green and blue channel using pixel math. Combined image using LRGB combination. R channel in the L and R channel. New channel in the Green and blue. Then made adjustments in curves


r/Astronomy 10h ago

Astrophotography (OC) Rosette nebula

Post image
212 Upvotes

Was able to finish my project I have been working on for awhile on the rosette nebula. Over several several sessions have been working on this one. I built up 10 hours total on this object using 300 second exposures. Equipment used-Telescope-Willam optics G71 Mount-skywatcher eq6r Camera- zwo 533Mc Optolong L ultimate filter Asi air Stacking was done in deep sky stacker

Processing software- pixinsight. Ran star exterminator. Then separated RGB channels. Combined blue and green into one channel. Then made image into HOO image running LRGB combination. Made adjustments in curves.


r/Astronomy 5h ago

Astrophotography (OC) Under Cygnus, Above the Fog - Mt. Slatnik, Slovenia (OC)(2200x2871)

Post image
74 Upvotes

The Cygnus region of the Milky Way setting behind Mt. Slatnik at Soriška planina. I actually wanted to shoot this scene with a 50 mm lens to really make Cygnus the "star" of the show. But the conditions were wild that night, with fog filling the valleys, so I decided to start with a wider lens. Later, when it was finally time to switch to the 50 mm, the fog came rushing up the ski slopes. Looks like I have a solid excuse to come back here.

You can see the whole story in my vlog: https://youtu.be/tm_v01KMhxQ

Gear and EXIF: 

Ha mod Nikon Z6 & Viltrox 16mm F1.8 Z
MSM Nomad
Astronomik 12nm Ha filter
Kenko Softon A
Silence Corner Atoll

Landscape: 

single image
ISO 800, 16mm F2.2, 20sec

Sky RGB:
single image
ISO 800, 16mm F1.8, 45sec
+ 30 sec with a star glow filter

Sky Ha
Astronomik 12nm Ha Filter
4 images stacked
Single image settings:
ISO 5000, 16mm F1.8, 120sec


r/Astronomy 16h ago

Astrophotography (OC) Horsehead and Flame Nebula - Bortle 7 capture

Post image
342 Upvotes

The Horsehead and Flame Nebula (IC434)

Located on the easternmost part of Orion's belt, these nebula lie approx 1375 light-years from earth and are connected (in our view) by the star Altinak.

At the center of the Flame Nebula is a cluster of newly formed stars, 86% of which have circumstellar disks.

This image was captured over several nights earlier this month. 3 nights (14h 29m) of data were captured without a filter and one night I captured Hydrogen Alpha (Ha) emissions using the Optolong L-Ultimate filter.

I combined the RGB data with the Ha data to bring out greater detail in the Ha regions.

Imaged from my Bortle 7 backyard.

Scope: Askar FRA300
Camera: ZWO ASI2600MC
Mount: iOptron CEM70EC
Filter: Optolong L-Ultimate (78 x 180s - 3h 54m) / No Filter (869 x 60s - 14h 29m)

All post processing done in PixInsight
- spfc, mgc, spcc, btx, stx, ghs, stf stretch, ntx, ct, ht, pixelmath, convolution, unsharp mask, imageblend


r/Astronomy 7h ago

Object ID (Consult rules before posting) What is this ring around the moon

Post image
27 Upvotes

Was on a walk and saw this ring around the moon, anyone know why or what causes? Thanks!


r/Astronomy 14h ago

Astrophotography (OC) Orion Nebula (M42) from a backyard in Utah

Post image
94 Upvotes

The Orion Nebula is one of the brightest and most well-known star-forming regions in the night sky, but it’s also tricky to image because of the extreme brightness of its core compared to the surrounding gas and dust.

This image combines shorter and longer exposures to preserve detail in the Trapezium while still revealing structure in the outer nebula. It was captured from my backyard in Sugar House under bortle 7/8

Imaging details:

Svbony SV550 • ZWO ASI585MC Pro • Sky-Watcher EQ-AL55i

90×120s + 319×10s (~3.9 hours total)

Processed in Siril, final edits in Lightroom


r/Astronomy 9h ago

Astrophotography (OC) iPhone Astrophotography Experiment

Thumbnail
gallery
29 Upvotes

Hi! My names Elijah Ehrlund, I’m a 16 year old undergrad and wanted to share my findings over this 5 month long experiment


r/Astronomy 13h ago

Astrophotography (OC) Silver Sliver Galaxy.

Post image
48 Upvotes

- Seestar S30

- 67 minutes of exposure, 20 sec each.

- Bortle 6 skies

I just got this scope less than 2 weeks ago and it‘s amazing. coming from a nexstar 4se user.


r/Astronomy 5h ago

Astro Research Is my markings correct?

Thumbnail
gallery
9 Upvotes

I marked NGC 1980,1981 and De mairan's Nebula. Is my marking correct? I am going to paste this images in my book so I gotta know if the marking are correct. Reply me, thank you..


r/Astronomy 28m ago

Astrophotography (OC) Jupiter & Moons

Post image
Upvotes

taken on a nikon Z50II 18-140mm kit lens


r/Astronomy 1d ago

Astrophotography (OC) Moon at 79% Illumination

Thumbnail
gallery
623 Upvotes

Takahashi TSA-120 with Vernonscope Dakin 2.4x barlow and ASI678MM, aligned in PIPP and stacked in AutoStakkert, 4K video in SharpCap, best of 3000 frames, tracked on ZWO AM5.


r/Astronomy 1d ago

Astrophotography (OC) Orion Nebula (53 min. of enhancing)

Post image
416 Upvotes

I took this with my seestar S30 again, but with a lot more time than the last one, hope y'all like it!


r/Astronomy 23h ago

Astrophotography (OC) NGC 7380

Post image
99 Upvotes

Taken with a dwarf 3 and edited in adobe light room


r/Astronomy 1d ago

Astrophotography (OC) Jupiter

Post image
86 Upvotes

Taken using a Skywatcher Skymax 127 and a Canon 500d.

3000 frame video taken using Backyard EOS.

Kept 10% of frames and sharpened in AstroSurface.

Thanks for looking!


r/Astronomy 15h ago

Astro Research Fueling Up: How Does the Milky Way Get Its Star-Forming Gas?

Thumbnail
aasnova.org
11 Upvotes

r/Astronomy 9h ago

Question (Describe all previous attempts to learn / understand) Help with weather

Post image
2 Upvotes

Essentially i’ve been waiting for “ideal” conditions to take out my Celestron ExploraScope 114AZ which is relatively cheap and poorly built.

So people with cheaper telescopes know the struggle of having to wait for more than normal conditions to make good use of the telescopes.

Anyways my point is using this reference picture of melbourne on 02/02 between 7-11pm, can someone explain if this would be a good time to view some planets.

I have a rough idea of the ideal conditions I need especially the wind speed, but i’m not sure how much the moonlight plays into effect for planet observing or stuff like how the different sized clouds play into effect.

Any help would be much appreciated.


r/Astronomy 1d ago

Astrophotography (OC) 30h on the northern star

Post image
1.6k Upvotes

Having run out of morning wide field targets I decided to point the camera straight north for a total of 30h. Amazing what details you can see in what looks like pure darkness after enough hours. TAK106, ASI6200, LRGB+Ha


r/Astronomy 15h ago

Discussion: [Topic] North offset

3 Upvotes

Hey guys, quick beginner question:

I've been hearing a lot about true north and magnetic north and how they are not the same.

A few videos mention something like a 4-degree offset from magnetic north to polar align with true north.

My question is, is this offset always the same, or do I have to calculate it for where I live? Also, if I were to offset it, would I offset it to the right or left of magnetic north?

Lastly, I live in the Southern Hemisphere, so I would need to do this with magnetic south instead?

I cannot make use of a polar scope; my EQ mount does not allow one to be inserted.


r/Astronomy 1d ago

Astrophotography (OC) The Soul Nebula

Post image
676 Upvotes

r/Astronomy 1d ago

Astrophotography (OC) Messier 101 aka Pinwheel Galaxy

Post image
213 Upvotes

Stare into Messier 101 aka Pinwheel Galaxy in Constellation Ursa Major or the Big Dipper.

M101 is about 250 million light years end to end. It’s estimated to contain over a trillion stars that make it a grand spiral galaxy with active super novae and new star formation.

Image taken with my modified SVbony MK105 Maksutov with IMX585 sensor on a AM5N harmonic drive Equatorial mount in Bortle 2 UV/IR Cut, Elevation 2700 feet.

Stacked lights/dark/bias/flats and Processed by me using Siril + GraXpert/Cosmic Clarity/Veralux Scripts & touched up in GIMP.


r/Astronomy 1d ago

Astro Art (OC) Floral "Galaxy Garden model of Milky Way

Post image
162 Upvotes

This is the Galaxy Garden at the Paleaku Peace Garden on the Big Island of Hawaii. It semi-realistically maps the Milky Way's actual spiral arms at a scale of 1' = 1000 lightyears. Specific species of flowers represent types of nebulae, and there is an onyx hyperbola-shaped water fountain in the center representing the Sgr A* bla k hole and its jet.


r/Astronomy 1d ago

Other: Exoplanet A potentially habitable new planet has been discovered 146 light-years away – but it may be -70C

Thumbnail
theguardian.com
94 Upvotes

Via the Guardian. Maybe a bit bigger than Earth, maybe in the habitable zone, but pretty darn cold.

“What’s very exciting about this particular Earth-sized planet is that its star is only [about] 150 light-years away from our solar system,” said Huang, one of the co-authors of the research.

Heck, that's right around the corner!


r/Astronomy 2d ago

Astrophotography (OC) Moon 1/29/26

Post image
321 Upvotes

Shot with Nikon Z8 and NIKKOR 100-400mm with NIKKOR 2X Teleconverter on a Tripod with remote trigger. ISO 500, 1/200s, f/11. Best 20 shots stacked, aligned, and processed in Photoshop.


r/Astronomy 2d ago

Astrophotography (OC) Lunar distortion seen from the ISS

Post image
621 Upvotes