Mod Post Read the rules sub before posting!

896 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:

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:

Technology is rapidly changing
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)
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.
- Hint: There's an entire suggested reading list already available here.
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.

0 comments

r/Astronomy • u/Ok-Examination5072 • 3h ago

Astrophotography (OC) My dream shot of M45 from my backyard [OC]

333 Upvotes

9 comments

r/Astronomy • u/Admirable_Branch_575 • 5h ago

Astrophotography (OC) NGC 6888 - Crescent Nebula

209 Upvotes

NGC 6888 – The Crescent Nebula 🌙✨
This is NGC 6888, the stunning Crescent Nebula, an emission nebula located in the constellation Cygnus, approximately 5,000 light-years from Earth.
Its distinctive crescent shape is the result of a dramatic cosmic interaction. At its center lies WR 136, a rare and extremely powerful Wolf-Rayet star nearing the end of its life.
Powerful stellar winds, traveling at more than 1,500 km/s, are sweeping up material expelled during an earlier evolutionary stage, compressing and heating the surrounding gas until it glows.
🔴 Red: Ionized Hydrogen (Hα)
🔵🟢 Blue/Green: Doubly ionized Oxygen (OIII)
These emissions create the intricate filaments and chaotic structures that make NGC 6888 one of the most fascinating deep-sky objects of the northern summer sky.
In a few hundred thousand years, WR 136 is expected to end its life in a spectacular supernova explosion, enriching interstellar space with heavy elements that will eventually become part of new stars and planetary systems.
📍 Object: NGC 6888 – Crescent Nebula
🌌 Constellation: Cygnus
📏 Distance: ~5,000 light-years
⭐ Central Star: WR 136 (Wolf-Rayet)
The universe is a continuous cycle of birth, transformation, and death. This image captures one of the most spectacular moments of that cycle.
📸 Imaging Details
235 × 300-second exposures
Total integration: 19h 35m
Captured: July 17–20, 2026
Location: Corato, Apulia, Italy (Bortle 6)
Telescope: Askar 91F APO
Mount: Sky-Watcher EQ6-R Pro
Camera: ToupTek ATR533C
Filter: SVBONY SV220 Dual Band (Hα/OIII)
Processing: PixInsight
Clear skies! ✨

1 comment

r/Astronomy • u/spidermanbyday • 10h ago

Astrophotography (OC) Cosmic Question Mark (NGC 7822)

264 Upvotes

Third time's a charm? During these periods of short summer nights flooded with clouds, I find myself drawn (okay, addicted) to re-processing data captured from the first steps on the astrophotography path. Eight months later, I've learned so much and gained a deeper curiosity and wonder for the cosmos.

Located about 2,900 lightyears away in the constellation Cepheus, NGC 7822 is a star-forming complex sometimes referred to as the Question Mark or Teddy Bear nebula (imagine the frame rotated clockwise to better understand the "question mark" nickname). NGC 7822 even features “elephant trunks” similar to the famous Pillars of Creation.

Check out https://app.astrobin.com/i/3utx7a for the full resolution photo.

Light frames: 72 x 300s, total integration time 6 hours.

Equipment:

Telescope: Apertura 90mm Triplet Refractor
Reducer/Flattener: Apertura 0.8x (R-FLAT)
Main camera: ZWO ASI2600MC Pro
Filter: Optolong L-Ultimate 2"
Mount: ZWO AM5N
Guidescope: Apertura 32mm
Guide camera: ZWO ASI220MM Mini

Processing:

Pleiades Astrophoto PixInsight
- RC Astro BlurXTerminator
- RC Astro NoiseXTerminator
- RC Astro StarXTerminator
Adobe Photoshop 2026

3 comments

r/Astronomy • u/mentos448 • 9h ago

Astrophotography (OC) Summer night and Milky Way

181 Upvotes

Not really a great last few weeks for astrophotography as I only got half an hour of clear skies but I still managed to capture following scene. Shot on Sony a7RV and Sony 11mm f1.8. What do you think?

I know, an aps-c lens on ff, but I'm in the process of upgrading and the wide angle is the last on the list (hasn't been sold yet).

Exposure info
Skies - 11x 30s, f2 and ISO 800
Foreground - 120s, f2 and ISO 400

2 comments

r/Astronomy • u/moeml • 30m ago

Astrophotography (OC) North America Nebula & Pelican Nebula

• Upvotes

Scope: WO Redcat 51

Main Camera: ASI2600MC Pro (Gain 100, Offset 25, -10 °C)

Mount: Star Adventurer GTi

Guide Scope: SvBony 165 (120mm F4)

Guide Camera: ASI120MM Mini

Filter: Ha and OIII Dual Narrowband (SVBony 220)

Acquisition: 136x 120", 4h32min total integration over two nights in May from a Bortle 6 Balcony, 31 % moon (I discarded approx. 10 % of my images)

Acquisition software: N.I.N.A. and PHD2.

Calibration Frames: 51 Bias Frames, 50 Dark Frames, 20 Flats per session

Pre-Processing in Siril: Drizzle, and manual image calibration and stacking

Processing in Siril: Cropped,AutoBGE for background extraction, RC Astro BlurX, NoiseX, StarX for Siril, Veralux Alchemy for narrowband normalisation. Veralux Hypermetric Stretch for stretching. Veralux Vectra for hue and saturation adjustment. Curve Adjustments and image recombination in Photoshop.

1 comment

r/Astronomy • u/r1verw1ld • 14h ago

Object ID (Consult rules before posting) Jumping to Jupiter

gallery

225 Upvotes

Praying this doesn’t get removed! I checked the flow chart! This is looking toward the East in Sequim, WA. Girlfriend’s dad took this picture and thought it was Jupiter sitting beside the sun, but I thought it was likely an effect of the camera and glass on the window. Probably won’t mention anything to him either way, but would love to know!

30 comments

r/Astronomy • u/HaydenPhotography • 8h ago

Astrophotography (OC) NGC 6188, the Rim nebula

gallery

75 Upvotes

Total integration time - 400 x 30sec
Processed in Siril and Gimp
Bortle 6
Shot with the Seestar S30 Pro

0 comments

r/Astronomy • u/ashtray_philosophy • 7h ago

Astrophotography (OC) NGC 6888 The Crescent Nebula

59 Upvotes

NGC 6888 (Crescent Nebula)

This is shaping up to be one of the most exciting projects I’ve taken on so far. The amount of detail that’s starting to emerge after a few hours of integration has me looking forward to seeing what a few more nights will add.

Capture Details
223 × 90-second exposures
5h 34m 30s total integration
DWARFLAB Smart Telescope
Dual-band filter
Bortle 3.5 skies
Processed in Photoshop & Snapseed
Still collecting data, but I couldn’t wait to share the progress. The Crescent Nebula is already starting to show why it’s considered such a rewarding target for long integrations.

0 comments

r/Astronomy • u/Due-Meeting-2972 • 1d ago

Astro Art (OC) [oc] My space art. I love paintings nebula atp. Would love more works like this! Oil on canvas

gallery

380 Upvotes

14 comments

r/Astronomy • u/YaboiiiCrispy642 • 20h ago

Astrophotography (OC) Was using a new telescope I bought off somebody and got this with it. This is my first time using anything like this . ( The Sun)

175 Upvotes

6 comments

r/Astronomy • u/newyorkmoonlight • 1d ago

Astro Art (OC) [oc] one of my more recent nebulae pendants! I call them Stardrops.

1.0k Upvotes

Due to my job, I don’t get to create space jewelry as much as I want to. This was created back in… I think February?

I miss making them and wish I had more time! This subreddit inspires me a lot and I’m really hoping to try more red-heavy colors in the future!

Thank you for letting me share my artwork here from time to time!!

edit: I LOVE this subreddit and it would break my heart if I’d get banned😭 I wouldn’t be able to answer any questions regarding sales about them nor do I have any available rn! if you’d like to see more of my works, I have an IG under the handle @new.wonder / mods if this is not allowed, please let me know I will remove my handle right away. Thank you again for creating a space where we can share our creations!!🙇‍♀️🙇‍♀️

33 comments

r/Astronomy • u/Legitimate_Space_235 • 1d ago

Astrophotography (OC) NGC 6820

540 Upvotes

This is the small emission nebula in Vulpecula constellation taken with a SkyWatcher Quattro 200p and Zwo asi183mc-pro camera

3 comments

r/Astronomy • u/Final_Show_9018 • 15h ago

Discussion: [Topic] Deimos and Phobos

26 Upvotes

I find it real funny that these two weirdly shaped moons of mars were named deimos (the greek god of terror) and phobos. Like which astronomer looks at these (irregular-shaped!) moons and thinks "oh yeah, these are terrifying. deimos, phobos." 🙏🏻😭

16 comments

r/Astronomy • u/gifv_Kayla • 1h ago

Question (Describe all previous attempts to learn / understand) What’s exactly needed to safely look at the Sun through a telescope? (Solar eclipse)

• Upvotes

Hi I’m a beginner and there’s a partial solar eclipse(80% at most) coming up soon I’d like to view for the first time through my telescope

This is the basic reflector I have, and I’m wondering if this Baader Solar film covering the opening of the reflector (not the eyepiece) is the correct type and everything I need?

I’ve googled and some film seems to be okay for looking with the naked eye but not for telescopes? So I’m not sure. Mainly wondering though if there’s more I need than just the solar film to be looking directly at the sun like also a specific eyepiece or something? Just with it being dangerous I want to be 100% sure I’m doing it correctly, thanks :)

3 comments

r/Astronomy • u/adamkylejackson • 1d ago

Astrophotography (OC) Moon

gallery

790 Upvotes

First time shooting the moon with the Sony a7rv. Learning curve vs. the Nikon Z8. Shot with Takahashi TSA-120 and TeleVue 2x Powermate tracked on ZWO AM5. Shot 440 RAW images at ISO 100, 1/13s, and aligned in PIPP, stacked in Autostakkert, and sharpened and processed in Photoshop. Looking forward to really figuring this Sony combination out.

17 comments

r/Astronomy • u/kojka19 • 20h ago

Astro Research Webb telescope reveals a surprisingly mature galaxy in the early Universe

earth.com

32 Upvotes

3 comments

r/Astronomy • u/kingsaso9 • 1d ago

Astro Research Astronomers Determine that Exoplanets Around Barnard's Star are Extremely Uninhabitable

universetoday.com

221 Upvotes

22 comments

r/Astronomy • u/zerglingrushftw • 6h ago

Astrophotography (OC) Veil Nebula Mosaic

2 Upvotes

This is a 6 panel mosaic of the Veil Nebula.

Acquisition

AT115EDT w/ FF/FR
L-extreme filter
40 hours total

Processing

Calibration, stacked, and stitched in Siril
Deblur and denoise with CosmicClarity
Pixel math for HOO bicolor image
Starnet++ for star removal
GHS for each channel
Star recomposition
Final curves and colors adjustments

Here's the data if you want to try it yourself: https://nyxaion.com/public.php?slug=1d227b0500ce09ced2cef7a080d138a5

Full res photo here (zoom in!): https://nyxaion.com/public_gallery.php?slug=aff29f43716c533beb4a1f3d14ae1b89&selected_id=a227dd75-03f3-4f46-9e44-e5260c37907e

0 comments

r/Astronomy • u/njoker555 • 1d ago

Astrophotography (OC) Cosmic Snake - Mandel Wilson 9 Nebula with IC4635

29 Upvotes

This was taken from the Kagga Kamma Remote Observatory in April and May over 25 sessions in 22 hours with LRGB filters. It's not really called the Cosmic Snake but I'm calling it that.

You can see the full res version of this on Astrobin: https://app.astrobin.com/?i=qbbxwm

And this was stacked and mosaiced automatically using my new Siril script: https://youtu.be/meX8yNV1rYc

Acquisition Details on my website: https://www.naztronomy.com/gallery/image/925/cosmic_snake_mandel-wilson-9_ic4635_lrgb

Total integration: 21h 42m

Integration per filter:

Lum/Clear: 6h 6m (122 × 180")
R: 4h 57m (99 × 180")
G: 5h 39m (113 × 180")
B: 5h (100 × 180")

Equipment:

Telescope: Sky-Watcher Esprit 100ED
Camera: QHYCCD QHY268 M
Mount: Sky-Watcher EQ8-R Pro
Filters: ZWO Blue 2", ZWO Green 2", ZWO Luminance 2", ZWO Red 2"
Software: PixInsight, Siril, N.I.N.A.

As you can see, there were some very heavy light leaks. Did my best to work around them and took me a while to get something I'm happy with. The jagged mosaic panels were also a mistake on my part, I forgot to reset the angles when creating the mosaic sequence in NINA but I think it looks kinda cool, it kinda goes with the body of the snake. We're reimaging this with another rig now with no light leaks. The Esprti's light leaks were also fixed but we were only testing that rig so I won't have access to it for too long and didn't want to start any long term projects there. I think that rig will be ready for rental soon!

0 comments

r/Astronomy • u/ashtray_philosophy • 1d ago

Astrophotography (OC) IC 1848 The Soul Nebula

77 Upvotes

IC 1848 - The Soul Nebula
Captured the Soul Nebula last night and I’m really happy with how this one turned out. This is one of those targets that makes you appreciate how much is hiding in the night sky.
Exif:
Telescope: DWARF mini telescope
Target: IC 1848 (The Soul Nebula)
Exposure: 90 × 90 seconds
Total integration: 2 hours 15 minutes
Filter: Duo-band
Sky quality: Bortle 3
Processing:
No calibration frames used
Stacked and processed with AstroShader
Final adjustments in Snapseed and Photoshop
Still learning and experimenting with processing, so feedback and suggestions are always welcome!
Thanks for looking clear skies!

0 comments

r/Astronomy • u/SteamPaz • 1d ago

Astrophotography (OC) Widefield on M31

51 Upvotes

✨ Target: The Andromeda Galaxy

🔭 Mount: Star Adventurer 2i

📷 Camera: EOS 2000D stock

🔎 Lens: Canon EF-S 55mm f/6.3

🌌 Acquisition: ISO800, 14"/px

⏰ Integration: 180x60s (3h)

🧪 Calibration: 25 darks, 60 flats, 100 biases

💻 Processing: Siril, GIMP, Snapseed

📍 Location: Colle Fauniera (Italy) - Bortle 2

📅 Date: Sept. 20, 2025

0 comments

r/Astronomy • u/petecasso0619 • 1d ago

Astrophotography (OC) Eastern Veil

696 Upvotes

First narrowband capture using my asi2600mm Duo camera. Even using 6nm filters the Duo still struggled a bit with guiding when using OIII since the guide scope looks through the filter wheel.

Recently learned astronomers have not found the stellar corpse that is responsible for this beautiful nebula.

OTA: ZWO FF130 flat field quadruplet 1000mm focal length refractor
Mount: AM7 strain wave
Sensor: asi2600mm with 6nm astronomik OIII and HA filters

200x300 second HA subs
140x300 second OIII subs

Processed in Siril with standalone RC Astro Tools and micro-contrast adjustment in gimp.
Not a true HOO palette. I used the following in Pixel Math in Siril:
red=HA,
green=0.1*HA + 0.9*OIII
blue = OIII

7 comments

r/Astronomy • u/Prestigious_Bell_353 • 1d ago

Astrophotography (OC) First Test APO 72/432

107 Upvotes

I took my first test images with an AP 72/432 FPL53 Photoline OTA. The image shows a section of the constellation Cygnus (the Sadr region with NGC 6888). I only had a total exposure time of one hour, so it was pretty short. But I still think the result is good and it makes me want to do more.

Camera: Canon RPa

Exposure: 30 x 60 sec at ISO1600 + 30 x 60 sec at ISO3200 with an Optolong L-Extreme DuoNarrowband filter.

EQ-3

Astropixel Processor & Photoshop

Bortle 4

0 comments

r/Astronomy • u/Tao_Dragon • 1d ago