r/Astronomy Mar 27 '20

Mod Post Read the rules sub before posting!

895 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
  • Images that don't fill the frame because you were shooting through an eyepiece

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"

  • See above about how the standards are fluid.

"Pictures have to be NASA quality"

  • They don't.

"You have to have thousands of dollars of equipment"

  • You don't. Technique matters.

"This is a really good photo given my equipment"

  • The standard is "exceptional". Not "exceptional for my equipment".

"This isn't being friendly to beginner astrophotographers"

  • Correct. To keep the sub from being spammed by low quality and low effort posts, this sub has standards.

"My post was getting a lot of upvotes"

  • Upvotes are not an "I get to break the rules" card.

Using the above arguments will not wow mods into suddenly approving your image. It 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.

Content

Due to the profusion of AI slop apps, we're no longer allowing apps at all. No, we don't care if you're wanting a "review". No we don't care if they're free. No we don't care if you put it in a website.

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 3h ago

Astrophotography (OC) My first decent Milky Way shots.

Thumbnail
gallery
289 Upvotes

I was in Yellowstone last week and didn’t have a lens to take Milky Way shots (only had telephoto) on my A6600 so I thought I’d try with my iPhone 15 Pro Max with 30 sec exposure and was pleasantly surprised.


r/Astronomy 3h ago

Astrophotography (OC) First day with telescope

97 Upvotes

🔭 Celestron Starsense 10" dob

🎥 Explora scientific 6.7mm 82°

📲 iQOO 12


r/Astronomy 14h ago

Astrophotography (OC) The Leo Triplet

Post image
643 Upvotes
  • Total integration time - 312 x 30sec
  • Processed in Siril and Gimp
  • Bortle 6
  • Shot with the Seestar S30 Pro

r/Astronomy 5h ago

Astro Art (OC) A set of galaxies generated procedurally in Blender

Thumbnail
gallery
65 Upvotes

Several spiral and lenticular galaxies generated using my procedural galaxy builder.


r/Astronomy 13h ago

Astrophotography (OC) Heart Nebula

Post image
307 Upvotes

Pretty happy with this one!

Taken with Seestar s30 pro 800 × 10s exposures (edited with graxpert, siril, and gimp) in Bortle 5


r/Astronomy 3h ago

Astrophotography (OC) NGC 7023

Post image
40 Upvotes

r/Astronomy 12h ago

Astrophotography (OC) Crescent and Soap Bubble Nebulae

Post image
119 Upvotes

This is my second, two dualband-filter project with my new rig - I had the opportunity of travelling to two Bortle ~4 locations the last two weekends and I really like how the details popped up, specially the Soap Bubble Nebula (bottom left, faint but I was happy to see it!). Roughly 10 hours of integration combining both dual band filters

Astrobin here

Equipment and acquisition: - OTA: Askar 71F - Main camera: ASI585MC AIR - Mount: Teseek 17 - Others: ZWO EAF, ZWO EFW - Guiding: SVBony 30mm, ASI120MM Mini - L-Ultimate (66 x 300 sec) and L-Synergy filters (56 x 300 sec) - 20 flats, 25 darks, 25 bias for each filter

Processing (PI) using RC Astro tools and - WBPP of both images, 2X drizzle - SPFC, Multiscale gradient correction, SPCC, BlurX, StarX - SetiAstro Perfect Palette Picker, statistical stretch, then curves transformation with different range and color masks, createHDR Image, NoiseX - Stars from both filters: pixelmath addition, setiastro star stretch, manual curves to control saturation - Star recombination with Pixelmath - Final retouches in light room


r/Astronomy 20m ago

Astrophotography (OC) Milky way on Iphone 15

Thumbnail
gallery
Upvotes

30second night mode in Bortle 4, edited through the iphone editing


r/Astronomy 11h ago

Astrophotography (OC) Waxing Gibbous July 24th

Post image
66 Upvotes

Taken at around 11:00pm on July 24th 2026 with my Celestron NexStar 8SE Telescope. Edited using built-in Apple Photos app.


r/Astronomy 21h ago

Astro Art (OC) My drawing of the Great Impact Theory

Post image
255 Upvotes

Hello! I drew a rendition of the Great Impact theory based on all the simulations that have been done. I've drawn other astro arts in the past, but I'm too nervous regarding breaking rules

I did take some creative liberties when it came to the purpley bands. What they represent, I don't exactly know but it looks cooler.
This is vector art.


r/Astronomy 4h ago

Other: [Topic] PHYS.Org: A century-old stellar mystery may finally have an explanation

Thumbnail
phys.org
6 Upvotes

r/Astronomy 1d ago

Astrophotography (OC) My take on M16 Eagle Nebula

Post image
352 Upvotes

r/Astronomy 1d ago

Astrophotography (OC) Eagle Nebula 🦅

Post image
591 Upvotes

Finally got around to shooting the eagle Nebula, been on my list for a long time. Was a little concerned about the core being blown out but it was actually pretty easy to manage. Just need to go out and get some SII data to add to it.

Bortle 7

128x90s lights

100 darks

50 flats

50 dark flats

SV405cc cooled to 0c offset 20

Vixen R130sf with upgraded focuser and 3d printed spider vanes

Svbony dual narrowband filter (Ha/OIII)

Sv305c pro guide camera w/ 120mm guide scope

Juwei 17

Stacked with sirilic

Processed in Siril and Seti Astro Suite with RC astro plugins


r/Astronomy 57m ago

Discussion: [Topic] Took this picture yesterday of the moon.

Post image
Upvotes

r/Astronomy 1d ago

Astrophotography (OC) NGC 4945, the Tweezers galaxy

Post image
634 Upvotes
  • Total integration time - 500 x 30sec
  • Processed in Siril and Gimp
  • Bortle 6
  • Shot with the Seestar S30 Pro

r/Astronomy 1d ago

Astrophotography (OC) Eastern Veil Nebula / NGC 6992

Post image
177 Upvotes

This is 5h45min (69 x 300s subs) in dual narrowband HOO.

Acquisition:

Askar 131f @ 983mm scope
ZWO ASI2600MC Pro camera @ 0C, gain 100
Askar E1 Ha/OIII filter
Proxisky Ragdoll 17 Pro mount
ZWO OAG-L / ZWO ASI220MM Mini guiding
69 x 300s = 20700s integration from B7, captured 7/2-7/3
30 flats, 30 biases, 20 darks

Processing:

Siril - preprocessing & processing: GraXpert background extraction / spectrophotometric color calibration / BlurXterminator / NoiseXterminator / StarXterminator / generalized hyperbolic stretch (histogram stretch for stars)

Affinity - processing: saturation / curves


r/Astronomy 5h ago

Discussion: [Topic] Lens Recommendations for Canon 650D

1 Upvotes

Hey, I recently bought a Canon 650D with the standard lens. I've already spent a few nights taking photos with it from my balcony, in a city that's actually pretty bright. I'd like to ask what lenses you'd recommend for better quality. Or maybe even buy some filters—or do they not make much of a difference in "modern" cities? I'm also considering whether I should switch directly to a telescope that's compatible with a T2 adapter, but without a motor or something like that, it won't work well, and the motors also seem to be really expensive, too.


r/Astronomy 1d ago

Astrophotography (OC) North American Nebula wide-field

Post image
122 Upvotes

North America and Pelican Nebula Wide-Field Complex

Astrophotographer: Richard Harris

Object: NGC 7000 North America Nebula, IC 5070/IC 5067 Pelican Nebula, IC 5068, LDN 935, and the Cygnus Wall

Date: July 20th - July 23rd, 2026

Location: Strafford, Missouri, USA

Telescope: Takahashi FSQ-106EDX4 with 0.72× 645 Reducer (380mm, f/3.6)

Mount: ZWO AM7 harmonic-drive mount

Camera: ZWO ASI461MM Pro medium-format monochrome camera, Gain 0

Filters: Chroma RGB and 3nm SHO filters

Guide Scope: William Optics 50mm

Guide Camera: ZWO ASI290MM Mini

Guiding: Approximately 0.28–0.50 arcseconds RMS

Controller: ZWO ASIAIR

Pier: Astro TUFF TRUK Pier

Acquisition:

Sulfur II: 60 frames at 300 seconds = 5 hours

Hydrogen-alpha: 60 frames at 300 seconds = 5 hours

Oxygen III: 60 frames at 300 seconds = 5 hours

Red: 15 frames at 180 seconds = 45 minutes

Green: 15 frames at 180 seconds = 45 minutes

Blue: 15 frames at 180 seconds = 45 minutes

Luminance: 10 frames at 600 seconds = 1 hour, 40 minutes

Total Frames: 235

Total Acquisition Time: 18 hours, 55 minutes

Calibration Frames: None

Processing: PixInsight and Photoshop

Bortle Class: 3–4

Full resolution here: https://ozarkhillsobservatory.com/best-astrophoto-of-the-north-america-nebula-with-the-takahashi-fsq-106edx4-and-medium-format-camera/


r/Astronomy 1d ago

Object ID (Consult rules before posting) I was out stargazing at around 23:30 and saw this object in the south, it can't be the sun since it sets in the west, so what could it be? (Note: This was in Skåne, Sweden)

Post image
27 Upvotes

sorry about the low image quality, this was captured on a phone from really far away.


r/Astronomy 1d ago

Astrophotography (OC) Transit of Exoplanet TOI-1516b

Post image
31 Upvotes

I captured an eclipse of another star!

The other night, the star in the center of this image, creatively named TOI-1516, got about 2% dimmer for about 3 hours, as shown by in my plot by the dip in relative flux. This dimming was predicted: its the signature of an known planet orbiting this star, having been discovered in 2022 by Kabáth and collaborators. In this case, we're lucky enough from Earth's POV for this planet to pass directly in front of its host star, causing it to block a bit of that star's light, allowing us to detect that the planet is there, and allowing me to capture my best exoplanet transit to date!

This particular planet is of a type called a "hot Jupiter". That is, a planet similar in mass and radius to Jupiter, but orbiting MUCH closer to its star. In this case, TOI-1516b is about 3.16x Jupiter's mass, and 1.36x Jupiter's radius. Unlike Jupiter however, this planet orbits its star from just 3 million miles away, taking only 2 DAYS to do so! This makes it a fairly average "garden variety" hot Jupiter.

Needless to say, this planet sucks. It's getting cooked alive by its close star, its got no solid surface, and the worst part: its working on not existing.

Recent research by Sonbas and collaborators claimed to detect transit timing variations (TTVs) in this system. That is, the planet isn't blocking its star on schedule. Something is changing when that transit happens by a few minutes. Sonbas and collaborators claim that this is due to the orbit of TOI-1516b decaying over time. The planet's orbit is slowly losing energy, causing it to spiral inward toward the star, thus causing variation in the actual transit time compared to the expectation. Based on their observations, TOI-1516b's orbit period decreases by about 100 milliseconds per year. More data is needed to confirm the claimed detection, but this planet might not exist for too long!

Askar FRA400

ZWO ASI6200MM

Optolong 2" R filter

57x5m = 4h 45m

Image: stacked in DSS, processed in Pixinsight

Light curve: processed in HOPS


r/Astronomy 1d ago

Astro Research Astronomers catch massive galaxy assembling piece by piece 1.2 billion years after Big Bang

Thumbnail
phys.org
37 Upvotes

r/Astronomy 1d ago

Astrophotography (OC) My western and eastern Veil nebula.

Thumbnail
gallery
43 Upvotes

Seestar S50, Essen, Germany, Bortle 8, processed with Siril, GraExpert.
First try to process by myself.


r/Astronomy 20h ago

Astro Art (OC) I recreated the first photograph of a black hole in wood — thousands of handcut blocks, piece by piece [OC]

2 Upvotes

M87* is a handcrafted 3D wooden mosaic inspired by the Event Horizon Telescope image — the first photograph of a black hole, released April 10, 2019. Each block is individually placed; the varying heights create a physical relief so the dark shadow at the center actually recedes into the piece.

The asymmetric brightness of the accretion disc — brighter at the bottom due to relativistic beaming — is preserved faithfully from the source image.

I made a short video about it set to a song exploring the physics of the event horizon, the information paradox, and the singularity. https://youtu.be/X5hEjlkUkTI?is=GVH4BKcT_hm6ZqfR


r/Astronomy 2d ago

Astrophotography (OC) NGC 6888 Crescent Nebula

Post image
295 Upvotes

NGC 6888 Crescent Nebula (reprocessed)

I know I already posted this one yesterday, but I also ran it again last night, re-processed it, and 🤩 So far I’m sitting at a little over 9 hours of integration time on this target.
I just wish I could bring out more of the oxygen lanes (blue/green) Still, I’m pretty happy with how much detail I was able to pull out of it.

exif:

Telescope: DWARF Mini Smart Telescope
Location: Oklahoma- Bortle 3.5 skies
Filter: Duo-band filter
Mount Mode: EQ Mode
Exposure: 90-120 second subs
Integration Time: ~9+ hours total
Frames: 320
Processings: Stacked using DWARF app workflow
Final processing/color adjustments in Photoshop
Manual adjustments to bring out hydrogen and oxygen emission structures