Skip to content

About

A site I run alone

Every astrophotograph published here is mine, made from the Puy-de-Dôme between October 2024 and September 2026. No manufacturer image, no stock image.

How these images are made

Three instruments, a Unistellar eQuinox 2, a DwarfLab DWARF 3 and a Vaonis Vespera Pro. None of them has an eyepiece. The image builds minute after minute, on the phone screen, by stacking short exposures. It can go on for several nights. That is what is called enhanced vision.

Empilement : adding short exposures together into one image, the signal adds up and the noise cancels out. Pose unitaire : one single exposure before stacking, often from 10 to 60 seconds.

The exposure time shown on each image is not an estimate. It is read off the caption the device burns in itself at the bottom of the frame. That caption is then cropped off for the web. The coordinates, the filter and the date come from the same place.

What is checked, and what is not

  • Checked: the exposure times, the dates, the coordinates, the filters. They come from the original files.
  • Sourced: the specifications and the prices of the twelve devices. Every product entry carries its sources, and the year the prices were recorded.
  • Not tried: nine of the twelve devices. It is written on their entry, in plain words.
  • Declared: I sell the devices I compare, and it is written on every product entry.
  • Never: a figure rounded in somebody's favour, an invented opinion, an affiliate link.
Cumulative integration
165h
Shots taken
56
Entries
41
Instruments in hand
3

Temps d'intégration : the total exposure time, the sum of every exposure stacked on an object.

Which device did what

The total above is spread very unevenly, and that is information in itself. One square, one object from the catalogue; one row, one device. The devices I have never had in my hands keep their row, and it is empty.

  1. DwarfLab DWARF 3

    23 objects 98h 04m 34 shots

  2. Unistellar eQuinox 2

    14 objects 4h 08m 17 shots

  3. Vaonis Vespera Pro

    4 objects 62h 37m 5 shots

  4. Celestron Origin

    never had in hand

  5. DwarfLab DWARF Mini

    never had in hand

  6. DwarfLab Draco

    never had in hand

  7. Unistellar Odyssey

    never had in hand

  8. Vaonis Vespera 3

    never had in hand

  9. Vaonis Vespera Pro 2

    never had in hand

  10. ZWO Seestar S30 Pro

    never had in hand

  11. ZWO Seestar S50 Pro

    never had in hand

One square, one object from the catalogue. The grid is the same on every row, so their lengths can be compared, and the 41 filled squares are exactly the 41 objects published here, not one more and not one less. Objects and hours are counted per object, on the instrument of its deepest session; shots are counted per shot.

The 8 empty rows are the point, not an oversight. These devices have never been in my hands: their entries are built on public sources, and they say so. An empty row is not a bad rating, it is an absence of first-hand evidence, and I would rather write that down than fill it in.

The instruments

One device in its bag

This is the real bulk of one of these instruments, with the bag closed. The photograph is mine. It does not say which of the twelve devices it is carrying, and I am not going to guess that for you.

A black carrying bag, closed, set down on a pale floor: woven fabric, one vertical seam down the middle and a reflective strap along the edge.

The carrying bag, closed 02/06/2025

Photograph by the author · location not logged

The equipment photographs on this site are mine. The device they show is not named, and it will not be named until it is established: the brands were erased when the album was sorted, and the inventory file does not say which of the 12 devices is in the frame. I do not guess it, any more than I guess a field of view. The dates are the dates of the files.

Counting method

How these 165h are counted

A total exposure time does not simply add up. Two exposures of the same object are either two nights that add together, or two states of one and the same stack. It is the caption burnt in by the device that says which. Here is the rule applied, and the three cases it settles.

  1. 01 · Re-exports

    An image exported twice is still one image

    One and the same stack can be exported several times. With stars and without stars, or in several colour treatments. The 72 files published come down to 56 distinct acquisitions, grouped on date and exposure. The versions stay visible in the galleries; they count only once in the hours.

  2. 02 · Declared stacks

    A declared stack is not counted twice

    When the caption carries “2 nights” or “3 nights”, the successive exposures are the states of one and the same stack. They are not nights to be added together. The Iris shows 2h 03m, 4h 25m, 6h 25m, 11h 34m : only the last one is new sky. Adding them together would give 24h 27m for 11h 34m actually accumulated.

  3. 03 · Independent sessions

    Two separate nights add together

    Conversely, when nothing declares a stack, each session counts for itself. The galaxies de Bode et du Cigare (M81 · M82) were photographed on 5 March and then on 8 April 2026. A month apart: 1h 13m + 1h 11m = 2h 24m. Keeping only the longer would throw away the 1h 11m of the other night.

Applied to the 41 entries, this rule gives 9,889 minutes of integration time, that is 165h. Two other ways of counting were tried, then set aside. Adding up every exposure shown counts the same photons up to four times. Keeping only the deepest exposure of each object throws away nights that really were independent. The first inflates the figure, the second shaves it down. The figure published here sits in between because it follows the captions, not because it suits.

Open reservation

Une légende non tranchée, 7h 12m en jeu

One single case in the catalogue is not settled by its caption. It is flagged here, rather than buried in a footnote.

The galaxie d'Andromède was photographed on 29 August 2026 (7h 12m) and then on 1 September 2026 (10h 20m). Neither caption carries the word “nights”. Everywhere else, I write it as a matter of course when I stack. The rule therefore counts these two sessions separately.

Does the second session absorb the first? If it does, this object falls back to 10h 32m, and the site counter to 158h. I have not settled it. Until I have, I publish the literal reading of the captions. It assumes nothing that is not written.

That is the only reservation on the counter. The other stacks in the catalogue are declared by their caption and settled by rule 02.

Published today

17h 44m 3 sessions · site total 165h

0 towards 22h 12m · cumulative integration on this object

If the reservation is lifted

10h 32m hypothesis · site total 158h

0 towards 22h 12m · cumulative integration on this object

The field

Twilight, before the first exposure

I have no studio. These two images are mine, made at twilight. Their location is not logged, so it is not written down. The coordinates you read on the catalogue entries come from the caption burnt in by the device. They do not come from memory.

The knoll with the tower, on the left, sitting on the sea of mist; on the right a slope of meadows already touched by the low sun, with its frosted hedges and its power lines.

The slope the low sun has just touched 29/12/2024

Photograph by the author · location not logged

Crepuscular rays fanning out above a ruined dry stone wall, in a field of stubble striped with swathes after the harvest.

Rays fanning out over a field of stubble 10/08/2026

Photograph by the author · location not logged

What I sell

I sell these devices. Here is what that changes

This site started out as my logbook of exposures. Today it is also a point of sale. The twelve devices on this site can be ordered from me. The contact form is the only way to order one. Saying so is more honest than hiding it behind an affiliate link.

What that changes. I have an interest in your buying. I make money when you order a device through this site. You have every right to read these pages knowing it.

What it does not change, and what can be checked page by page. The twelve product entries carry their weak points, in the same place and at the same size as their strong points. Nine of the twelve devices have never been in my hands. Their entry writes it down and their scale stays at zero. Their gallery stays empty, rather than filled with press release images. No manufacturer funds me, supplies me with content or proofreads these pages. No link on this site earns a commission. The specifications published are the manufacturers' own, sourced one by one. They do not change according to what happens to be available for sale. The comparison ranks nothing. It measures the hours spent with each device. And it prints under every bar that an empty track means not tested, not bad.

What a partnership can be. A club, an association, a school, a town council, a shop, a manufacturer: I answer. What is open to discussion comes down to three things. A device lent for the length of a trial. A session in front of a group. An observing evening put together jointly. Say what you are proposing, for when, and for how many people.

A session, an evening. For a school, a town council, an association or an evening among friends, the Events page says what I offer and how to write to me about it.

What a partnership will never be. A paid review. An entry proofread by the brand before publication. A place bought in the comparison. The refusal above holds for a partner too: no funding, no supplied content, no proofreading. A device lent for a trial is written up as such on the entry that talks about it, next to the record of hours, and the loan does not make the entry any kinder. A proposal that asks for the opposite gets a written answer, and the answer is no.

If you ever find a figure on this site arranged in favour of what I sell, write and tell me. The correction will be made and dated, like the others.

Propose a partnership

Rights

On the use of the images

The astrophotographs on this site belong to me. They are not royalty free. For teaching, community or press use, write in: the answer is usually yes, with a credit.

The brands cited belong to their respective owners. I am not affiliated with any of them, I receive nothing from them, and I publish no commissioned links. I do, on the other hand, sell the devices I compare, and I earn an income from them: that is written above, in plain words. The brand overlays present on the original captures have been removed from the images published here.

Ask to use an image