I've seen people physically affixing wire/string to their telescope to create diffraction spikes. I have also read that it can be done in post-processing. Which method is easiest/preferred?
What is your process for creating Star Diffraction Spikes?
I wish I knew how to get rid of them though.
If you absolutely must have spikes on your refractor or SCT images, there are three ways:
1) StarSpikesPro, which costs $36.
2) The string trick, or better yet, a 3D printed set of vanes to put over your objective.
3) Buy a Newt or RC instead. Then you won't be able to get rid of the spikes like Andrea.
I have tried StarSpikesPro, and it helped a few images that had soft stars or color aberrations that I wanted to cover up. However, it is quite tricky to get the spikes to look natural, as if they came from the telescope itself. I have also tried crossed strings over the corrector plate of my SCT, but the spikes were plain white and added nothing to the image cosmetically.
At the end of the day, most people say they would rather not have spikes, but I'm not sure everyone practices what they preach. I noticed a slight preference for images with spikes in Top Picks selections, having served as a reviewer last year. It's especially true for images featuring open clusters, which lose their sparkle without the spikes. It's also more difficult to criticize flat-top star cores or slightly non-round stars when spikes are covering them up. Hope I don't anger anyone by planting these suggestions, but there is some truth in them.
1) StarSpikesPro, which costs $36.
2) The string trick, or better yet, a 3D printed set of vanes to put over your objective.
3) Buy a Newt or RC instead. Then you won't be able to get rid of the spikes like Andrea.
I have tried StarSpikesPro, and it helped a few images that had soft stars or color aberrations that I wanted to cover up. However, it is quite tricky to get the spikes to look natural, as if they came from the telescope itself. I have also tried crossed strings over the corrector plate of my SCT, but the spikes were plain white and added nothing to the image cosmetically.
At the end of the day, most people say they would rather not have spikes, but I'm not sure everyone practices what they preach. I noticed a slight preference for images with spikes in Top Picks selections, having served as a reviewer last year. It's especially true for images featuring open clusters, which lose their sparkle without the spikes. It's also more difficult to criticize flat-top star cores or slightly non-round stars when spikes are covering them up. Hope I don't anger anyone by planting these suggestions, but there is some truth in them.
I left my Bahtinov mask on once. Boy, did I get diffraction spikes.
If you absolutely must have spikes on your refractor or SCT images, there are three ways:
1) StarSpikesPro, which costs $36.
2) The string trick, or better yet, a 3D printed set of vanes to put over your objective.
3) Buy a Newt or RC instead. Then you won't be able to get rid of the spikes like Andrea.
I have tried StarSpikesPro, and it helped a few images that had soft stars or color aberrations that I wanted to cover up. However, it is quite tricky to get the spikes to look natural, as if they came from the telescope itself. I have also tried crossed strings over the corrector plate of my SCT, but the spikes were plain white and added nothing to the image cosmetically.
At the end of the day, most people say they would rather not have spikes, but I'm not sure everyone practices what they preach. I noticed a slight preference for images with spikes in Top Picks selections, having served as a reviewer last year. It's especially true for images featuring open clusters, which lose their sparkle without the spikes. It's also more difficult to criticize flat-top star cores or slightly non-round stars when spikes are covering them up. Hope I don't anger anyone by planting these suggestions, but there is some truth in them.
Very detailed response - thank you. I didn't realize they came happened naturally with those scopes, but it makes sense. I like the way the look on photos that don't have a tremendous amount of detail going on, but wouldn't want them on every photo.
Robert Winslow:
I left my Bahtinov mask on once. Boy, did I get diffraction spikes.
haha - can't say that I haven't almost done that myself...
I’m one of the odd ones that absolutely loves the defraction spikes on images. (I shoot mostly with newt’s and currently have 8, 10 & 12” instrument's although if my 12” performs as expected I may be getting rid of the 8 & 10, but we will see) Anyway to me there is just something visually appealing to them. I do have a secondary setup that I’m rebuilding that will have a 6” mak-newt and an 80mm refractor for wide field images.
Dale
Dale
I've seen people physically affixing wire/string to their telescope to create diffraction spikes. I have also read that it can be done in post-processing. Which method is easiest/preferred?
Star Spikes Pro 4, as a PS Plug-in
andrea tasselli:
I wish I knew how to get rid of them though.
There are physical masks that reduce spikes. Better than nothing.
I've seen people physically affixing wire/string to their telescope to create diffraction spikes. I have also read that it can be done in post-processing. Which method is easiest/preferred?
Star Spikes Pro 4, as a PS Plug-in
Thanks, Morian. I’ll look into it.
Dale Penkala:
I’m one of the odd ones that absolutely loves the defraction spikes on images. (I shoot mostly with newt’s and currently have 8, 10 & 12” instrument's although if my 12” performs as expected I may be getting rid of the 8 & 10, but we will see) Anyway to me there is just something visually appealing to them. I do have a secondary setup that I’m rebuilding that will have a 6” mak-newt and an 80mm refractor for wide field images.
Dale
I agree, I like them as well, I always enjoy seeing one in a nebula.
Star Spikes Pro is a great tool if you use PS in your processing. I use it for reduce/mask halos in OIII channel and it works very well. I also tried spikes from time to time but for this I followed rhedden's tip #3 and bought a SW Quattro.
Hello.
I am newbie in Astrophotography but the first time I saw some strange star spikes in some processing photos a few days ago, they dont look real to me , after that, I realize that was made with a Photoshop Plugin, when you are a Newton owner you can see the diferencie immediately.
I am newbie in Astrophotography but the first time I saw some strange star spikes in some processing photos a few days ago, they dont look real to me , after that, I realize that was made with a Photoshop Plugin, when you are a Newton owner you can see the diferencie immediately.
I use a newton telescope. The thinner the spider, the longer and sharper the spikes
Processing Diffraction Spikes
My current imaging workhorse is an NP101. Decent focal length and speed with 540mm at f/5.4. I live in NE Ohio, though, and it's VERY cloudy here in the colder months. I see a bunch of people saying things like, "yeah, I don't really cal...
Discusses post-processing diffraction spikes for NP101 telescope imaging.
Artificial Diffraction Spikes?
Hi Dear AstroBinners, Does anyone know how to make artificial diffraction spikes on a DSLR footage? I dont mean it in hardware terms, Im talking about post-processing. Like if I have an image with stars, which I got using a DSLR, how can I turn them ...
Directly addresses creating artificial diffraction spikes in post-processing.