What have I really learned after these two months of mono?

That an image is never really ‘finished’ – it’s abandoned :-) And that the time it takes to ‘finish’ it tends to infinity…
Yes, that’s it: in the end you simply abandon it, with the inner conviction (even if it isn’t supported by logic or facts) that it would have kept getting better.

With OSC I’ve always been rather hasty; I’ve discovered a side of my personality I didn’t know I had, and at almost 60 I have to conclude that this hobby is also a journey of psychological introspection.
At this point I find myself wondering what isn’t astrophotography :-)
What do you think? Have you had this kind of epiphany as well?

CS dear friends,

Frank

I tend to see it as an iterative process of diminishing returns. The data only has so much to give and as you work it you get closer to that limit until the only thing that would make it better is more/better data, mostly more. That’s when you get more data or call it finished.

I started out with OSC, it just made more sense to me coming from DSLR photography.

Finally, I got my ASI1600 MM Pro and got the big enchilada with the EFW and Filters. I mean, I jumped in with both feet.

Tried Mono for 3.5 years but yearned to go back to the utter simplicity of OSC. Finally, got my ASI2600 MC Pro and I’m where I wanted to be since the beginning. Really happy with the total simplicity and not spending my time in processing.

I will say my start was to say the least very rocky with substandard equipment. But I learned, and equipment improved. Now, I’m well ahead of where my start took me. Where I once dreamed of. And very glad I came back to OSC.

This whole thing is a learning experience. And one that will break you if you let it. Well worth the pains if you don’t.

This post made me think of my own journey. When I first began mono imaging, I would spend a lot of time on it first and then would loose interest once I began the RGB data simply because the lack of detail and clarity of it compared to the mono/lum. Simply put, I didn’t understand the correct balance. I learned a lesson however, and that is…..to save the best for last. Now, when I approach a project, I’ll do the RGB first and will have the drive to finish with lum. Works for me! For now, I ditched the filter wheels and opted for a two camera approach with a filter slider. A OSC for RGB and Mono for lum utilizing a simple filter slider.

This post is currently under review and is temporarily unavailable.

Frank "Voloire" · Apr 25, 2026, 06:08 PM
That an image is never really ‘finished’ – it’s abandoned :-) And that the time it takes to ‘finish’ it tends to infinity…
Yes, that’s it: in the end you simply abandon it, with the inner conviction (even if it isn’t supported by logic or facts) that it would have kept getting better.
With OSC I’ve always been rather hasty; I’ve discovered a side of my personality I didn’t know I had, and at almost 60 I have to conclude that this hobby is also a journey of psychological introspection.
At this point I find myself wondering what isn’t astrophotography :-)
What do you think? Have you had this kind of epiphany as well?
CS dear friends,
Frank

For me, each image session contains many journeys. I walk down one path until I reach what I feel is the end…extracted what I think I can out of the data. Then I start the journey all over again taking slightly different paths and decisions. Then repeat until my paths start to converge. In the end, I take my favorite few journeys and often combine them to bring out the best in each. I don’t stress about making the wrong choices since I know I can just start over again. Always something learned along the way.

I almost agree. The only distinction between mono and OSC is that by the time you get to mono, you are generally more committed and further down a path to try to produce better images. I have been as obsessed with messing with my OSC images as I have ever been with mono and I always reached a point where I simply had to abandon obsessive tweaking and set it free. I still haven’t reached a point where I know for sure when an image is “right” and hence finished; however, I have reached a point where I (mostly) know when it’s wrong and that feels like progress.

- John

churmey · Apr 30, 2026, 03:53 AM
This post made me think of my own journey. When I first began mono imaging, I would spend a lot of time on it first and then would loose interest once I began the RGB data simply because the lack of detail and clarity of it compared to the mono/lum. Simply put, I didn’t understand the correct balance. I learned a lesson however, and that is…..to save the best for last. Now, when I approach a project, I’ll do the RGB first and will have the drive to finish with lum. Works for me! For now, I ditched the filter wheels and opted for a two camera approach with a filter slider. A OSC for RGB and Mono for lum utilizing a simple filter slider.

I tend to be that way as well. In B8 I have to shoot my L frames with a near IR filter and the results are always amazing and really get me excited. Under those same skies, RGB is a battle for every photon. It takes a long time to get enough data to be useful. The up side is all my projects are multi-night and multi-object to stay above 60 degrees. When I’m collecting RGB I’m also getting IR for the next target so there’s always something to look forward to the next morning.

luca giovanni lauriti · Apr 30, 2026, 01:13 PM
…You always get what you pay for. Process with Siril, … it's free…

Interesting two sentences.

One thing I would not take as a 100% truth is that more expensive will always be better. Things can be high in price for many reasons, so important and some not. I think the fact that, it this point, astrophotography isn’t a totally “pay to play” endeavor, proves the point.

Tony Gondola · Apr 30, 2026, 06:37 PM
One thing I would not take as a 100% truth is that more expensive will always be better. Things can be high in price for many reasons, so important and some not. I think the fact that, it this point, astrophotography isn’t a totally “pay to play” endeavor, proves the point.

But you can’t make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear. My equipment, especially my cameras have improved over the past 15 years. And I think I’ve reached a nice comfortable plateau now where I can enjoy what I get.

Asking for more is not really worth the ducats it would require. Then we have to “Dumb Down” our images to use them on the WWW. So that really makes spending more unpalatable to me.

100%… With OSC I would crank out an image from a raw, linear stack to a completed image in 10~15 minutes… but when I’m working with my mono camera, especially in LRGB, you can go back and forth over so many variables and tweak and adjust iteratively… I have some images with 8+ revisions on AB because I’m never 100% satisfied…

Strangely, I find narrowband to be far less fiddly…. there is a process that simply works for me, and I’m very happy with its results.

Absolutely, though. Astronomy and astrophotography is an exercise in psychological self discovery, deep introspection and sometimes a hint of masochism…

I’ve been doing astrophotography for about 7 years now, started with a DSLR. I’ve been using the ASI2600MC Pro for about 4 years now, and it’s been a learning experience. I’ve seriously considered the mono approach because I tend towards perfectionist. But I also think about my time constraints, and have decided (for now) to stick with one shot color.

I’ve spent my time in the past year refining my equipment, paying much more attention to good collimation, getting tilt out of my system (as much as possible 🤨), fine-tuning tracking, etc. Finally, I’ve been working on my processing skills. This is a wide open area for me with lots of room for improvement. Yes, definitely start out with good data, but I’m learning that processing is the other half of the equation that can really make a big difference in the final result. The experts bear this out in both their recommendations and results.

Started with OSC and now fully committed to mono. Why? I enjoy image processing as much as the acquisition, and IP can be done in broad daylight on a rainy day at the rate of one’s choosing.

Great question Frank…really got me thinking. And perfectly timed as I am just beginning my second year as an astrophotographer. I also discovered a side of myself I was convinced didn’t exist. I AM an artist. I always believed I was a scientist period. Work and play was either scientific or technical; and sometimes both. I discoverd my inner artist with my very first image of M81 and M82 (https://app.astrobin.com/u/CHEMI5T?i=7wnx0l). This is why I am so passionate about this hobby: it is both technical AND artistic. I approach each target from both perspectives and it is a joy. My only regret is that I didn’t discover AP until age 61; I’ve been missing out all these years.

I think when I started imaging I thought about it more deterministically and scientifically- that a technically “correctly collected and processed” image would look a certain “correct and accurate” way. I did not realize how many variables - controllable, uncontrollable and some hidden, would shape the ultimate outcome. That’s both exciting and humbling and creates endless opportunities.

As a professional scientist, I still struggle a bit with embracing the “art” of it, wanting to fall back on scientific correctness. Exploring that balance and tension is a fun growth area for me, as is how every image is a learning experience and a journey.

Looking back, the learning curve has been steep with plenty of mistakes, but all have been part of the fun!

John Hayes · Apr 30, 2026 at 03:23 PM
I almost agree. The only distinction between mono and OSC is that by the time you get to mono, you are generally more committed and further down a path to try to produce better images. I have been as obsessed with messing with my OSC images as I have ever been with mono and I always reached a point where I simply had to abandon obsessive tweaking and set it free. I still haven’t reached a point where I know for sure when an image is “right” and hence finished; however, I have reached a point where I (mostly) know when it’s wrong and that feels like progress.
- John

Images are never really done, they just hit the point of good enough for now. :)

Related discussions