WelcomeUser Guide
ToSPrivacyCanary
DonateBugsLicense

©2025 Poal.co

(post is archived)

[–] 2 pts

If the objects change over time how do you know that doing this isnt giving a false impression of the object? Taking a video of a spinning wheel, for instance, and then mashing a bunch of frozen frames together, is going to give an innacurate representation of the object

The only time that would really be a concern is with small and close objects like planets, but even then they are so bright you only need a few seconds to a few minutes of video for a sufficient amount of light frames. Sure, Jupiter's moons might be slightly different from night to night, but there's no way you can see detailed change in its clouds in a few minutes time. As for DSOs, I'm pretty sure some of the nebulae we see today look almost exactly the same as they did a century ago (for amateur astronomers at least) because they are light years wide and many light years away. There's no way I would see a change even with several weeks worth of imaging sessions on some objects.

[–] 1 pt

Stars twinkle.

Stars twinkle due to atmospheric refraction. In the same way that your TV combines RGB to make a multitude of colors, the combined light data from 1+ minute of video creates close approximation of the true color.