Debate: Should astronomy photos show real color or enhanced color?

I'm trying to decide how to process my latest nebula shot from last night. Do I post it with the natural hydrogen-alpha reds and blues straight from the camera, or do I boost the saturation and pull out the extra details that make it pop? I've seen folks on both sides get mad about it. What do you all lean towards? Does it matter if it's for a science sub or just for showing off, or is one way more honest?

2 comments

2 Comments

finley_wells6629d ago

The thing nobody's talking about is that "natural" color in astrophotography is kind of a myth to begin with. Our eyes can't see those wavelengths anyway, so even a straight-from-camera image is already a translation. I've shot the Orion Nebula and the raw data looks flat and reddish, nothing like what you'd see through binoculars. If you're posting to a science sub, just label the processing steps clearly, but for sharing with friends, a little boost helps them actually see what you saw through the scope. Your mileage may vary, but I've gotten way more engagement from folks who don't normally care about space when I give it a gentle saturation bump rather than a harsh filter look.

hill.david29d ago

@finley_wells66 you just made me realize I was wrong about natural colors, guess I'll ease up on the filters now.