Why bother going out in the cold ?

[GasGiant]

When Ai can do it for you from the comfort of your armchair ..... 😂

 

 

[PeterStudz]

I enjoy being outside even when it’s cold.  And of course it’s not the same. I also got rid of as much unnecessary tech as possible. No PC or laptop for me, although I have a smartphone and iPad. Personally I was more than happy to see the PC out of the door having worked in IT for 30 yrs 😀

[Elp]

After all the time waiting, what harm is a little more pain?

[Ratlet]

Not relevant if the planets, but I take a perverse joy in the fact that some photon has spent the last couple thousand/million years trucking about the universe unimpeded only to end its existence on the backside of a teuchters eyeball.

Edited September 18 by Ratlet
It is its

[saac]

4 hours ago, GasGiant said:

When Ai can do it for you from the comfort of your armchair ..... 😂

 

But it can't do it can it?  Now if I wanted a cartoon drawing that would be different.  

Jim 

[omo]

Artificial Images: AI

Bit like HDR in photography - not what the mk1 sees

[Ags]

It may be cold outside, but there are PEOPLE inside.

[NGC 1502]

5 hours ago, Ratlet said:

Not relevant if the planets, but I take a perverse joy in the fact that some photon has spent the last couple thousand/million years trucking about the universe unimpeded only to end its existence on the backside of a teuchters eyeball.

Wot he said😊

[Elp]

Think the post was more to do with how far along AI image generation has come along though...

[GasGiant]

6 hours ago, Elp said:

Think the post was more to do with how far along AI image generation has come along though...

 

[Ratlet]

It's interesting how the stars appear different in each one.  Like there are none on Saturn and the moon looks like it has a field stop.

Wonder how that one will cope with nebula.  I tried that before on one and the results were universally awful.

[GasGiant]

[GasGiant]

[GasGiant]

Lollllz 😂

[Ratlet]

21 minutes ago, GasGiant said:

Lollllz 😂

You could probably seed these onto Facebook or tiktok.  5 million likes and it'll be posted by 30 other people claiming they took them.

Seriously though, I think it's pretty much at the point with nebula where you'd struggle to pick the AI art out of a line up on a casual look.  Except the horse.

Edited September 19 by Ratlet

[saac]

Ai generative art really doesn't  work for me, far too cartoon like in style, colour so far oversaturated and so obviously machine created with mistakes. Ai astrophotographs are worst offenders. 

Jim 

[saac]

9 hours ago, Elp said:

Think the post was more to do with how far along AI image generation has come along though...

But that the thing, I don't think it actually has reached anything near commendable. There is something about Ai generative art that just leaves me reaching for the bucket.  It's akin to the early days of PowerPoint where people flooded presentations with stupid clip art and transitions on every page. For me it still has some way to go before it is treated as something other than a curiosity. 

Jim 

[GasGiant]

21 minutes ago, Ratlet said:

You could probably seed these onto Facebook or tiktok.  5 million likes and it'll be posted by 30 other people claiming they took them.

Seriously though, I think it's pretty much at the point with nebula where you'd struggle to pick the AI art out of a line up on a casual look.  Except the horse.

This why I dont trust a lot of astro images. Its all edited with artistic license.

One pet peeve of mine are the colourised images of the moon. Utterly ridiculous in my opinion  

[ANTARES1_1]

16 hours ago, GasGiant said:

When Ai can do it for you from the comfort of your armchair ..... 😂

 

 

 

 

 

Ahh yess the oblonged eggturn( if you look closely it is not a geoid but and egg)

[GasGiant]

I like Ai as an expressive art tool. It can be fun

 

 

[ANTARES1_1]

51 minutes ago, GasGiant said:

Lollllz 😂

Try inputting witchhead nebula next🤣

[GasGiant]

not as comedic as one had hoped 😁

[Mr Spock]

We now live in a world where so much of it is fake.

I prefer the real thing. A good old fashioned sensualist. You can spent hours watching Jupiter's surface and its moons rotate, or studying the changing light on lunar craters, or looking at stars whose light can take from tens to millions of years to reach you.

[PeterStudz]

They look fake to us because we’ve done some astronomy. To a beginner, or someone that hasn’t done astronomy, they could seem real. Some of my friends, who haven’t done astronomy, think that sticking a camera (and these days a camera is a smartphone) up to an eyepiece is all you need to do to get “those space pictures”.

And is the question aimed at visual astronomy, astrophotography, or both? They are two very different things. 

Visual - is this even remotely close to, for example, the experience of seeing the veil for the first time in a Bortle 1-2 site with my daughter. A site along the Mediterranean coast, in pitch black, using a small reflector with the smell of the sea, wild thyme and the sound of waves lapping against the rocks? No and I doubt it ever will be. 

Astrophotography - I don’t do “proper” astrophotography. But with a smart telescope you are close to imaging without “going out in the cold”. You can, I believe, do this via a remote observatory (something that I have zero interest in). I was intrigued when my daughter drew some sketches of the planets - inc Jupiter, Saturn & Mars. They were all in an “upside down” Dob view. Even Mars had its North Polar Hood at the bottom/south. Now, over the yrs, from an early age, from way before we got a telescope, Alice has seen an order of magnitude more pictures of the planets which are all “the other way up”. So why did she draw them all in the way she’d seen them at the eyepiece? I suspect it’s because the experience had a far greater impact. When I asked her why she replied with:- “because they are real”, implying that the images she’d seen were somehow fake. Hell… I can well remember my first view of Saturn through a telescope when I was about 15. And trust me, that’s a long, long time ago! I certainly can’t remember my first picture of Saturn and I doubt “AI” would have made any difference. Now, if I, or my daughter, had been into astrophotography I bet that our own images would have far more impact, pleasure and value than anyone else’s, or something generated by “AI”. Doesn’t matter how real or fake they are. Is any photography actually real? 

Edited September 19 by PeterStudz

[PeterStudz]

46 minutes ago, GasGiant said:

One pet peeve of mine are the colourised images of the moon. Utterly ridiculous in my opinion  

Do you mean mineral moon images? I quite like them. I can see subtle colours on the moon and I’m not a fan of those who “greyscale” their lunar images. That’s just as fake. I also find that generally kids, with their younger eyes, are better at seeing subtle colours than most adults. There’s a topic on seeing lunar colour here…