5.77
#...
·
 |
|---|
|
Hello, I am wondering how some images get more attention than others - are there some basic rules for making a picture more "catchy"? Following example here: https://www.astrobin.com/1j53nc/ While this picture was processed in a decent way, I feel it could be bit more eye-catching. Do you think there is a way to make this image more attractive? I tend not to boost the saturation or contrast to levels where I'd feel uncomfortable. I also could reduce the stars further - but this is a dense star field in the middle of the Milky Way... I'd appreciate any suggestions, thanks! Chris |
3.81
#...
·
·
2
likes
|
|---|
|
hey christian, I think that your pictures are already "catchy". https://astrob.in/qmyme6/C/ especially your last picture has a pretty cool 3d effect that I really enjoy. I guess, if you want even more quality in your pictures, you should aim for even more exposure time and if you want to get an image of the day try shooting/finding unknown objects or shoot planets. those picutres seem to get plenty of iots. cs Andi |
0.90
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
| I don't know if is just false modesty, but your image selected by Andi (https://astrob.in/qmyme6/C/) is wonderful, especially the 3D effect about crescent nebula |
11.14
#...
·
·
2
likes
|
|---|
| Maybe firstly because your framing is too tight for what you are trying to demonstrate and secondly the bottom and lower left borders of the image seems as somewhat brighter as a consequence of a improper gradient removal. Also, the optical aberrations may annoy some (but not me FWIW). |
|
5.77
#...
·
|
|---|
Die Launische Diva: Hmm, I believe you have a point here....! |
11.22
#...
·
·
3
likes
|
|---|
|
This is a wonderful picture. Generally speaking, for a dense star field like this, it would be good to do a pass of BXT or standard star shrinking to make the stars less prominent. Another approach is to run star removal to enhance the background nebula without enhancing the stars and then to add the star back. Personally, I do a bit of both, because the two approaches are not really interchangeable. They work slightly differently. You may even do some unsharp masking or filtering (such as wavelet processing or high-pass enhancing of different scales) in the starless image, to further strengthen the structure in the nebulas that you would like to show people. The end result should be stronger impression of nebulas (bright or dark nebulas), which is generally what most people like. I hope this helps. |
6.96
#...
·
·
2
likes
|
|---|
Wei-Hao Wang: What I admire the most about your images is how well you handle the backdrop. For example this one: https://www.astrobin.com/ehe6f0/ I have seen M106 so many times, but I have never seen a better backdrop, with so many small tiny galaxies coming through. Don't get me wrong that M106 is phenomenal, but that background is what sets it apart from the others for me. |
7.67
#...
·
·
2
likes
|
|---|
Christian Koll: I see you only have RGB here, perhaps you could go HaRGB and get a little extra contrast in there. |
2.71
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
|
Color boosting using Photoshop layers. Contrast boosting using Softlight blending Bloom effect using Screen blending This is the result  |
16.18
#...
·
·
2
likes
|
|---|
|
Hi Cristian, With 3 APODs, and a huge percentage of Top Picks [+ plus nominations] from your 31 images, it should be me asking you how to make my images more catchy. I think your images are wonderful and I have started following you so I can take more inspiration from them. CS Brian |
8.78
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
| I would dump a substantial amount of time into the Ha signal. Looks like there's quite a bit left to expose in your photo. Ha IMO gives alot of depth, other than that, it's just a less interesting region. |
|
11.14
#...
·
·
2
likes
|
|---|
Brian Boyle: Asking for critique is one of the wisest decision a photographer can make. Portfolio reviews usually cost money but here are for free  In this community, besides people with an engineering/sciences background, there are photographers, graphic designers and professional artists who can offer advice on aspects other than the usual suspects like optical defects and technical flaws. Just having someone else to say a few words for your work is beneficial, assuming both parts of the equation are behaving like grown-ups (i.e., being constructive and being open to different opinions).
|
3.61
#...
·
·
2
likes
|
|---|
|
I think even if astrophotography is very techincal, in this regard you can use some creative ways to make your image more attractive to look at. The one big thing you as photographer can do, is to lead the eye of the viewer to the right place of the image to show them what you want to show them. you can do that with contrast, with color, with sharpness and leading lines. In your case I feel like the Nebula is quite hidden next to all the stars, which there is an abundence of. looking at this image your eye jumps around the image to find the focal point. Also because the Nebula isn't completely captured in the image, it doesn't stick out as the point of focus. Take any of your other photographs, you know what you're looking at and it's clear where the eye is lead to. In this case the eye is lead basically outside the image, that way you're kind of not satisfied looking at it. Nothing against, your images, they are really amazing!!!! But I think it's an interesting thing to think about while doing astrophotography. |
|
16.18
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
Die Launische Diva:Brian Boyle: Dear Die Lanichische Diva I hope you (or indeed the OP) didn't think I was questioning the request for feedback. I think it is entirely appropriate, as I find any and all feedback on my images really helpful. "Feedback is the food of champions" as my old boss used to say. Rather it was a sincere comment on the quality of Cristian's images as I view them. I am really pleased that he drew my attention to his work, as it is through viewing others work that I gain inspiration for mine. CS Brian |
|
5.77
#...
·
·
3
likes
|
|---|
|
Hello! To be honest, I am overwhemled by both the amount and message of your reactions! So thank you so much for your kind comments! Some objects can be processed to create a very intriguing 3D-effect, like the Wolf-Rayet image Andi and Fabio mentioned (appreciate your "heads up"!). Other objects are simply not suitable for creating such an effect, which is the case for the "Sitting Goat". I believe the object was framed with a field of view too small - as launische Diva pointed out - to get an immediate recognition of the animals' shape. I once took a picture with a 135mm lens of that region and I wanted to get a "closer look". However, I only have a 550mm system for longer focal lengths... Of course I could do a mosaic, but I doubt this target would justify the effort. As for general processing suggestions by Wei-Hao Wang (thanks!) - yes, these are indeed my standard processing steps. I do run BXT on my images and I do create two differently stretched versions (strong stretch for DSO, moderate stretch for stars) to get smaller stars in my final image. And of course I do some unsharp masking or highpass filtering on my starless DSO. The amount to which these processing steps are taken forward is a choice of personal taste - I like Adam Block's definition of "naturalistic" - so I tend not to overdo saturation or contrast. I intentionally did not take luminance or Ha exposures, since the goal was to outline the shape of the goat, not to get a crisp image of the tulip nebula. But to achieve this I realise the field of view was simply too small. What I find particularily interesting in relation to promoting your astrophotography is the art of playing on the "social media piano" - something I am not very good at, I suppose. Being a generation advancing the 50 years barrier (fast!) I am neiter on Facebook nor Twitter. Or to put it another way - getting attention on social media does not occur naturally to me (this thread actually being a very positive exception). To be honest, I don't get how other guys do it - and, I simply have to realise that very good social media skills can outrun any high quality astrophotography. However, astrophotography should never be about getting attention in the first place - this is just a bonus, at best. For me astrophotography is the joy of mastering technical skills, admiring the beauty of our universe and connecting with something greater than ourselfes - a kind of meditative practice. As humans we tend to be not satisfied with what we already have - so we probably need a reminder once in a while that any pressure or a hunt for more "likes" is not what life is all about. Enjoy your astrophotography, everybody! Chris |
5.96
#...
·
|
|---|
Christian Koll: *** that's a very subjective thing but typically I would say any photograph that has an innovative composition with excellent dynamic range, focus, noise and sharpening is a winner. Colour is a big part of it too... You can always look at the most liked photos on Astrobin to get a sense of what are the most engaging photos. *** |
11.91
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
You can always look at the most liked photos on Astrobin to get a sense of what are the most engaging photos. Going after the "most liked" photos is not necessarily the best idea. Of the thousands (?) of AB members, what fraction actually spends time perusing and liking every image? For me, other than the people I follow, it usually ends up just being an image I happen to catch by chance when I am on the webpage. I suspect a significant number of the "most liked" photos are simply from people who've taken the time and effort to cultivate a following. Not that there is anything wrong with it - there is a social aspect to this hobby, making a number of friends and getting affirmation online, that is a very valid pursuit. |
0.00
#...
·
|
|---|
|
Hey bud! I don't think I can comment much on the quality of your shots, wow! One thing I can with confidence say is that engagement depends on the userbase of the site you're posting on. On Instagram I find it hard to hit a trending deep sky shot. Good composition, punchy colors and sharpening (too much imo) do well on here. As well as a good start to a caption. Oh and using the 4/5 ratio is a must on Instagram imo. On here is the largest conversion rate for bad images from all the sites. If you can push the colors and sharpening up, the sky is the limit. On sites such as Reddit, the overall look and feel of your images as well as the story you sell (a good title goes a long way), get upvotes. Your shots would do great in something like r/space with an eye catching title and a good beginner orientated first comment. Hope you can pull something from this. Clear skies! ~Matija |
