PSA: A guy at the star party in Flagstaff said my deep sky photos were 'too colorful'

I was at the Arizona Star Party last fall, showing off a shot of the Orion Nebula I was really proud of. I had pushed the saturation to make the pinks and blues pop. This older guy, who had a big Dobsonian telescope, looked at my screen and just said, 'Looks like a cartoon. The real sky isn't that color.' He argued that processing should only show what the eye would see through a big scope, keeping things subtle. I said the whole point of a camera is to collect more light and color than our eyes can, so why not show it? That comment stuck with me for months. It made me question if I was making art or trying to show science. Where do you all stand on processing photos to be vibrant versus keeping them looking more natural?

3 comments

3 Comments

the_claire3mo ago

My uncle still thinks his film camera is better than my whole digital setup.

wilson.emma3mo ago

Ask him to show you his last ten shots from the film camera. The cost of developing usually ends that argument pretty fast.

olivia47823d ago

Whoa hold up, I'm kinda with the old guy on this one. If you push the saturation that hard it stops looking like the Orion Nebula and starts looking like a unicorn sneezed on your sensor. Shouldn't astrophotography be about showing what's actually out there, not what Instagram is gonna like?