 Hey, happy holidays everyone. Today's video is just going to be a bit of fun. We are going to look at OpenAI's ChatGPT. This has been in the news lots. You probably already know what it is, but it's basically a chatbot, but a super intelligent one that speaks just like a human. And so what we're going to find out in this video is ChatGPT also a good astrophotographer, or at least can it give convincing astrophotography advice. So here's what I did. I asked my Patreon community to send me questions, any kind of question at all related to astrophotography. I went through those questions and answered them all myself, wrote down my answers. Then I asked those same questions to ChatGPT and printed all of those out. And what we'll do in this video is we'll see each question. I'll give my answer. We'll look at ChatGPT's answer and determine who gave the better advice. So it's sort of like a game, but I'm also going to give sort of my perspective on the advice that ChatGPT gave compared to mine just to make the video a little bit more interesting. So I was considering having you guess my answer and ChatGPT's answer for every question. I think after we do a couple of these, it'll be very clear just based on our speaking style, whose answer is whose. But for this first one, we'll do it blind and you can guess. But after that, I'll probably just reveal who's speaking. Hi, Nico. My name is Amy and I'm an enthusiastic Patreon supporter. Thanks for everything you do. Here are a few possible questions for you. What filter should I use with my ASI 183MC Pro in Bordel 7 skies in order to help retain star color? So here's answer A. If the main object of your photograph is a dark nebula, a reflection nebula, a galaxy, or a star cluster, then the best choice for filter would be a basic luminance filter, also known as an IR cut filter, even from Bordel 7. If you're shooting a mission nebulae and you want to get a bit better contrast on those but still want to retain good star color, then instead I would suggest a gentle light pollution filter, like the Botter, Neodymium, or the Optalong-L Pro. Okay, and then here is answer B. In general, color filters can be used to enhance the visibility of certain features or colors in celestial objects. For example, a red filter can help bring out the red emission from hydrogen gas and nebulae, while a blue filter can highlight features that emit light in the blue part of the spectrum. When photographing objects with a wide range of colors, such as star clusters or galaxies, a broadband filter that transmits light across the entire visible spectrum can be a good choice. This type of filter will allow you to capture the full range of colors present in the object, resulting in more natural looking images. Okay, so which one do you think was the AI, and which one do you think was me? Give you a second here to make your decision. All right, so answer A was me speaking. I suggested specifically an IR-cut filter if shooting broadband, or a gentle light pollution filter if shooting a mission nebulae, and answer B was the AI. It started off with a paragraph about a red filter, a blue filter. It didn't seem to catch that Amy was talking about a color camera, the 183MC, because I think that first paragraph was a little bit confusing, but then the second paragraph was pretty good. It sort of corrected itself or took a second shot at it because this part about using a broadband filter on star clusters or galaxies was a little bit more on track. But I think my answer was more specific. I think this is something we'll see again and again, and that the AI writes a convincing answer, but it's just a little bit light on the specifics and maybe throws in a few questionable things that are maybe not super relevant. Okay, so I think it's going to be pretty obvious from here on out whose answer is whose, so I'm just going to always read my answer first and the AI's answer second, but I still want us to keep in mind for yourself when you're hearing these. Who do you think gave the better advice? Because in some of these questions, I think it's sort of a toss up or maybe even the AI wins. It's not always a slam dunk. Okay, this question is also from Amy. Will the Alec stream help bring out color in M45? Okay, here's my answer. So no, Messier 45, also known as the Pleiades, is an open star cluster with an embedded reflection nebula. Stars and reflection nebulae are broadband objects, so a dual narrow band filter like the Optalong L Extreme is not the right choice, in my opinion. Instead, I'd suggest using a luminance filter like the Astronomik L2 and use that if you're shooting full spectrum, like with an astronomy camera, or if you're shooting with a stock DSLR or mirrorless camera, you don't have to use any filter at all. Just go no filter and you'll get a great result on M45. Here's chat GPT's answer. It is possible that using an L Extreme filter with a telescope or camera to observe the Pleiades, also known as M45, could help bring out certain colors or features in the nebula. Okay, however, the effectiveness of this filter will depend on a number of factors, including the characteristics of the telescope or camera being used, the conditions of the sky and specific features that you're trying to observe. In general, filters can be a useful tool for enhancing the visibility of certain features in celestial objects, but they are not a magic solution and the results may vary. Okay, so I think it sort of bungled this answer. It obviously didn't know what the L Extreme filter does, that it's really only great on emission nebulae or bringing out emission pockets in galaxies. It's not the right filter choice for M45, but it didn't really go as far as saying that. It just sort of waffled about talking about filters. So I think I won this question and I think most people would agree. All right, next question. Hi Nico, this is Barry. My question is, in suburban Los Angeles, what is the easiest way to find the flaming star nebulae without using plate solving? I have just a manual setup, as you can see. This one was challenging. I feel like I could have written a big essay about finding things. I actually have a whole video about finding objects just with a DSLR on a Star Tracker setup. Maybe I'll link that here. But here's my answer. I tried to just keep it as brief as I could, but it's still got a little bit long. Okay, the flaming star nebulae is in the constellation Araiga, which this time of year from Los Angeles will basically start the night towards the eastern horizon and then it will be up all night transiting basically straight overhead and setting in the morning to the west. What I would suggest doing to find the flaming star is look at a planetarium app like Skychart or something like that or a paper star chart, where you can find the flaming star marked and then use either a red dot finder or a green laser pointer to Star Hop. And you're going to start at Capella, which is the brightest star in Araiga will be easy to find. And then Star Hop from there to El Nath and Hossalay, which are on the opposite side of the constellation. And the flaming star nebula is right in between those two stars and but a bit towards Capella, so sort of in the middle of that big shape that Araiga makes. So with your red dot finder or laser pointer and looking at that star chart, you should be able to work out roughly where the nebula is and get pointed towards it. And then what you want to do is start taking test shots at high ISO on your DSLR. And there's this very distinct grouping of five bright stars right next to the flaming star. And so when you see those five stars, you're going to know that you're very close to the flaming star nebula. And then you can perfect your framing from there. If you happen to be using a zoom lens on your DSLR, start zoomed out when taking the test shots. And that's going to help you find the star patterns a lot easier. You'll be able to center the flaming star and then you can zoom in to get your actual framing that you want for the shot. And remember, if you're taking test shots at high ISO, like 12,800 or something, put it back to the ISO you actually want to use for shooting when you're done finding the object. Okay, so that was my advice a little bit long and rambling. But I think I got all the important points in here is chat gpt's answer. To find the flaming star nebula from suburban Los Angeles, you can follow these steps. Number one, determine the best time to observe the flaming star nebula is visible in the northern hemisphere from late fall to early spring, and is best seen when it is high in the sky. Check an online almanac or astronomy app to find out when the nebula will be its highest point in the sky. Locate the constellation Araiga, the flaming star nebula is located within the constellation Araiga, which is visible in the eastern sky during the winter months, sort of use a star chart or sky map to locate the constellation or use an astronomy app on your smartphone to help you find it. Number three, use a telescope to locate the nebula. Once you have identified the constellation Araiga, use your manual setup to scan the area for the flaming star nebula. It will appear as a bright diffuse cloud of gas and dust within the constellation. You may need to adjust the focus and magnification of your telescope to get a clear view of the nebula. Okay, I'd say that answer was a mixed bag. I liked the detail about in number one, about finding the best time to observe and pointing out that the flaming star nebula is in the northern hemisphere available from late fall to early spring. I think I just assumed from when the question was being asked that, you know, this was being done now, but that was good detail. The last part about using a telescope to find it and that you'd be able to see a bright, diffuse cloud of gas, probably not. I mean, with a DSLR and lens, I don't think you're really going to see it even in a test exposure. It's not really a bright nebula. It's a dim emission nebula. So that part was a little bit off. Hey, Nico, this is David in Seattle. My question for the chatbot challenge is if you asked a thousand astrophotographers, what would be the top three reasons that they pursued the hobby? Okay, this one's sort of interesting, a little bit more creative, opinion based kind of question rather than just facts. So we'll see how the AI did on this one. Here's my answer first though. If you asked a thousand astrophotographers, I think you'd get lots of different kinds of answers as to why they pursued the hobby. But three answers that I think would come up a lot would be number one, that they've always loved space and telescopes. And so astrophotography is just a natural progression for someone who wants to see more of what's out there in the universe. Number two, that they enjoy complexity and problem solving. And this is why I think a lot of astrophotographers I've met are engineers. They like figuring out how things work and optimizing all the gear and getting it all to work together. And number three, and this might be the most common answer, is it started with just curiosity? You know, answering questions for themselves, like, can I really take a photograph of another galaxy in my backyard? And then after they realize they can, they just become hooked on the hobby because it's a very deep hobby and addictive to try to get better and better pictures. Okay, here is chat GPT's answer to the question. Here are a few possible reasons that astrophotographers might pursue this hobby. Number one, a love of the night sky. Many astrophotographers are fascinated by the beauty and majesty of the cosmos and enjoy capturing and sharing the beauty through photography. Number two, a desire to learn more about the universe. Astrophotography can be a way to learn more about the objects in the sky such as stars, planets, galaxies and nebulae, and to better understand their properties and behavior. Number three, a sense of accomplishment. Astrophotography can be challenging as it requires a combination of technical skills and patience. Successfully capturing stunning images the night sky can be a rewarding and fulfilling experience. Of course, these are just a few possible reasons and there may be many other reasons that astrophotographers pursue this hobby as well. So, I think the AI knocked it out of the park on this one and it was oddly similar to my answer. I swear that I did not look at the AI's answers. I wrote all mine first, but if you compare mine to theirs, our three possible reasons are very similar in a lot of ways, sort of in the same order even. It's weird. The first two answer reasons they gave, a love of the night sky and a desire to learn more about the universe, I sort of combined those into my first answer, which is just sort of like they've always loved space and telescopes. And then they don't have the one sort of about engineer and figuring things out. But the sense of accomplishment answer about like how it's really fun to just successfully capture stunning images, that's very similar to my answer of like it started with curiosity, but then it just becomes this addictive thing of getting better and better pictures. So, I think the AI did excellent on this one. If someone wrote out this as like a little essay for why astrophotographers are so interested in this hobby, I would believe this was a person writing this because it worked really well. So, this video has obviously been about the practical applications of artificial intelligence, which is a big topic in 2022. But I really wanted to understand AI and how it actually works. And so, when I want to understand something like that, I go to Brilliant. Brilliant is the sponsor of today's video. And Brilliant is just this amazing place for learning interactively through these little courses and interactive activities that you can just do for a few minutes every day. And they have a whole course on an introduction to neural networks. And neural networks are sort of an approximation of how our brain works and they're how they're training these huge AI models like GPT-3, which is what chat GPT is based on. It's the largest language model in the world and it uses this neural network technology to work. So, you can head over to Brilliant today and see exactly how these things work. You can get a really good basic understanding by following along with these lessons and learning how this all works for yourself. And I, of course, have a great offer for you today. If you're interested in Brilliant, if you head over to Brilliant.org slash Nebula Photos, link will be in the description. The first 200 to sign up, you get a free trial. If you do decide to purchase an annual membership, you're going to get 20% off by following my link. All right, next question. Hey, Nico. This is David in Las Vegas. I have a question. For astrophotography, are there different methodologies for capturing emission and reflection nebula? Thank you. Okay. My answer, I got pretty involved on this one too. Sometimes I just go on and on, so excuse my length for this answer, but here we go. Yes, there are. Emission nebulae are nebulae that emit their own light because the atoms in these giant clouds of gas are ionized. And the neat thing about them is that they shine at these very particular frequencies called emission lines. So, with emission nebulae, we can use narrow band filters that block most of the visible spectrum, but pass these emission lines like hydrogen, alpha, and oxygen 3. And these narrow band filters are very good for improving contrast with emission nebulae and also for blocking almost all of the light pollution. You can either use single line narrow band filters, which is common with mono cameras, or with a color camera, there are now dual band or tri band narrow band filters that allow you to capture many emission lines at the same time by using the Bayer matrix and the color camera to separate out the signals. You can also capture emission nebulae without narrow band filters, but most will be dominated by the hydrogen emission, so they appear just red. The important hydrogen emission line H alpha is a deep red, and it's partially blocked by the IR cut filter inside most stock consumer cameras. So, to get the most out of these cameras for capturing emission nebulae, many people will modify their cameras, meaning changing out the IR cut filter inside the camera for one that fully passes the HA signal. Reflection nebulae, on the other hand, are clouds of dust particles that are lit up by starlight, and so they take on the color of the star or stars that they are near. So, you can have yellow reflection nebulae, like the one near ontaries, or blue reflection nebulae, like the Pleiades. Unlike emission nebulae, reflection nebulae are broadband targets, meaning to get the most out of them we don't want to use special filters. Narrow band filters do not help here, meaning light pollution makes capturing reflection nebulae much more difficult. The best way to capture reflection nebulae is just to go to as dark a sky as you can, and capture them in full RGB. And you can use a stock color camera. Modification does not help with reflection nebulae at all, because their light falls completely within our normal visible spectrum. There is nothing blocked by a normal stock camera when it comes to reflection nebulae. So, that was a long answer. I have an even longer video on this kind of subject that's an exclusive Patreon video. If you're interested, you can join my Patreon to watch that. It goes into all the different kinds of deep sky objects, and the best approach for capturing them. Now here is chat GPT's answer to that question. Yes, there are different methodologies for capturing emission and reflection nebulae in astrophotography. Emission nebulae are clouds of gas and dust that emit their own light, often due to the presence of hot young stars within them. To capture an emission nebula, astrophotographers typically use a camera with a high sensitivity to hydrogen alpha wavelengths as these wavelengths are commonly emitted by the gas and emission nebulae. It is also important to use a telescope with a wide field of view and a long focal length to capture as much of the nebula as possible. Long exposures are typically required to capture the faint light from the nebula, and filters may be used to block out light pollution and other unwanted wavelengths. Reflection nebulae, on the other hand, are clouds of dust that do not emit their own light, but rather reflect the light of nearby stars. To capture a reflection nebula, astrophotographers typically use a camera with a high sensitivity to blue and ultraviolet wavelengths as these wavelengths are commonly reflected by the dust in reflection nebulae. It is also important to use a telescope with a wide field of view and a short focal length to capture as much of the nebula as possible. Long exposures may also be required to capture the faint light from the reflection nebulae, and filters may be used to block out light pollution and other unwanted wavelengths. Okay, so this answer was an example of one where I think the AI answers can be tricky, because on the whole it sounds good, but there are enough details wrong in here that I think this answer is fairly misleading if you were new to astrophotography. So for instance, one thing that I think is just straight up wrong is for emission nebulae, it says to use a long focal length, and for reflection nebulae, it says to use a short focal length. No, not really. I mean, there's a couple famous reflection nebulae that are pretty big. Ontario's in Roe, Fuyuki, and Pleiades, but other than that, reflection nebulae are mostly small, so you would need a long focal length to capture them. While emission nebulae, those are some of the, those are the biggest objects in the sky usually. Those are huge, like look at Cygnus. I mean, there's just huge swaths of emission nebulae there. So a short focal length works perfectly. You definitely don't need a long focal length to capture emission nebulae. So sort of mix that up, or at least shouldn't have even mentioned it. And then it sort of gave the same answer about filters, but that's the main thing that this question should be answering is what's the different methodology? It has to do with filters. With emission nebulae, you can use narrowband filters, including dual narrowband filters. With reflection nebulae, you don't. You just want broadband, so you can use a stock camera. But it sort of gave the same stock thing of like filters can be used to block out light pollution. Yeah, not really. You know, filters are really only effective for emission. So not my favorite answer there from chat GPT. Hi, I think I reached a level where I can produce an astrophotography image, an okay image. What should I do to produce a wow image? Okay, this is an interesting question. I'll be interested to see what the chat bot says about this. Here's my response. The difference between an okay image and a wow image is of course going to be in the eye of the beholder. For instance, if you show a non astrophotographer like just your family and friends, one of your okay images that you've taken now, I think they're going to be completely wowed by it. So maybe the question is more asking, how can I produce a wow image that's going to impress astrophotographers, including yourself? And that's a whole different game because astrophotographers have seen it all, right? And so I think the easiest way is to pick an object that is off the beaten track, but you think maybe has the potential to wow. So this is hard. It requires some research. But what I would suggest is maybe find an object that only like you can find maybe 10 images of online, like very few images of it exist. But it speaks to you in some way. You think that there's something there and then be prepared to put lots of time into capturing this and processing it because if very few have imaged an object, it's probably super difficult. But I think that's going to be the clearest path to a wow image to impress yourself and other astrophotographers is to pick something obscure and then put your own stamp on it to create sort of like a world class image of that maybe like the what we call the reference image for a particular object. That's going to be your best path to a wow. Okay, here's the chat GPT answer. There are several steps you can take to improve your astrophotography skills and create wow images of the night sky. Here are a few suggestions. Number one, practice, practice, practice is with any skill, the more you practice astrophotography, the better you will become. Number two, invest in quality equipment. Investing in good quality equipment can make a big difference in the quality of your images. Look for a camera with high dynamic range and low noise levels, a fast lens with a wide aperture and a stable mount for your telescope. Number three, learn about post processing techniques. There are many software options available for post processing such as Adobe Photoshop and Adobe Lightroom. Number four, shoot at a dark site. Light pollution from cities and towns can greatly reduce the visibility of faint objects in the night sky. Number five, experiment with different objects and techniques. There are many different objects in the night sky to photograph such as stars, planets, galaxies and nebulae experiment with different objects and techniques to find what you enjoy the most and what produces the best result. By following these tips and continuing to learn and improve your skills, you should be able to produce stunning astrophotography images that will wow your friends and family. Okay, this is an okay answer but very generic. If I just googled deep sky astrophotography advice, I think this is the kind of stuff that would come back. Go find a dark sky, learn about post processing, invest in a good mount, practice. The one I do like is the last one, experiment with different objects and techniques. That sort of goes to my answer, it's that the best way to do a wow is to really challenge yourself. Go after some object that's really obscure and hard and do a really good job with it and you'll wow everyone. But yeah, experiment, that's probably the only really great piece of advice here. The other ones are good pieces of advice but they sort of, I think, miss some context in the question because Gregory said, I've reached an astrophotography level where I can produce okay images. That suggests they're already, you know, know some of this basic advice. They don't need to hear this again. Okay, next question. Is using AI to process astrophotography images cheating? Okay, my answer to this is pretty short. Here's my answer. No, it's not cheating. As long as the astrophotographer isn't trying to hide their use of AI tools in processing, the only way it could be considered cheating is if the astrophotographer is trying to deceive through the use of AI and they won't admit what processes they used. That is a kind of deception that could be considered cheating. ChatGPT's answer is a little bit longer. Using AI to process astrophotography images is not necessarily cheating, as it is simply another tool that can be used to improve the final image. Like any tool, it can be used effectively or poorly. And the final result will depend on the skill and judgment of the user. In general, AI can be a useful tool for enhancing astrophotography images by automating certain tasks such as noise reduction, color balance, and contrast. It can also be used to perform more advanced tasks such as removing celestial objects from the image or creating a synthetic long exposure for multiple shorter exposures. However, it is important to note that AI is not a replacement for good photography skills and judgment. Astrophotography is still a creative pursuit that requires a good understanding of the technical aspects of photography, as well as an eye for composition and aesthetics. Using AI to process astrophotography images can be a helpful tool, but it is not a substitute for these skills. Wow. Okay, so I, this is I think ChatGPT's magnum opus of this test. This is a great answer. I really liked this one. I think I liked this answer even better than mine. I mean, mine really sort of got into what would it mean to cheat? But ChatGPT's answer, I just agree with everything it said here. You know, this is a really good point that using AI tools doesn't mean you're going to create the best image. Astrophotography is an art form, a creative pursuit, as it says. And it really requires on the judgment and skills of the photographer to use these tools effectively. So I really liked that, that answer. Hi, Nico. It's James here from the UK. Here's my question for your astrophot. Sorry if you can hear my son squealing in the background, but he's very excited about the video probably about stars. So yes, my question is, what in your opinion is the most reliable prime lens and DSLR setup for a beginner to astrophotography? Would you recommend zoom? Would you recommend wide angle? And thus why, what targets would you go for if you'd never shot astrophotography before? Untracked because I don't have a tracker. Here's my answer to that question. When I hear untracked, I think deep sky. So for deep sky astrophotography, I'd recommend a fast telephoto prime lens. And I think the most useful focal length for untracked might be 85 millimeter. So a fast 85 millimeter, you can't go wrong. But if I had to just pick one reliable lens, as you put it, I'd go for the tried and true Samyang, aka Rokinon 135 f2. The 135 f2 is just an amazing value for how well it does on the stars. It works well on tracked, but it will also serve you very well down the road if you do get a tracker. So I think it's well worth the cost. And it's available for all the major camera mounts. So if you already have a camera, just use the one you have. If you are a beginner who's buying a camera, I would suggest a used Canon or Nikon DSLR made after 2012, preferably one with a flippy screen. So don't spend too much on a camera for astrophotography. It's probably the least important part, but I like Canon or Nikon DSLRs and the flippy screen is nice, so you don't have to strain your neck getting on the ground. Okay, and the final chat GPT answer here. For a beginner shooting untracked astrophotography, a good starting point might be a DSLR camera with a fast lens and a wide aperture. Some examples of DSLR cameras that are popular among astrophotographers include the Canon EOS 60, Nikon D5300, and Sony Alpha A7S2. These cameras offer good image quality and low noise levels, which are important for capturing faint objects in the night sky. As for lenses, a wide-angle lens with a fast aperture f2.8 or lower is a good choice for untracked astrophotography. This will allow you to capture a wide field of view and gather as much light as possible, which is important for capturing faint objects. Some examples of wide-angle lenses that are popular among astrophotographers include the Rokinon 14mm f2.8, the Canon EF 16-35 f2.8L, and the Nikon 14-24 f2.8G. Okay, that's a fine answer. They never mention Milky Way, and sort of, you know, 14-16mm lenses, those are basically Milky Way or Aurora lenses, you're not gonna maybe constellations, but for capturing faint objects, not, you know, when I think objects, I think deep sky astrophotography, and wide-angle doesn't really do that so well. So my interpretation of the question, untracked astrophotography, I think deep sky, like I said, so that's why I suggested a telephoto lens. You know, sort of following my philosophy on YouTube, you know, capturing things like Orion and Pleiades and Andromeda untracked, I think is more fun, you know, for me than just a lot of wide field. But that's really an opinion kind of thing, you know, and also an opinion over what the meaning of untracked astrophotography. I think the term really came about with doing deep sky without a tracker. You know, Milky Way has been, photography has been done untracked for a very long time, going back to the film days, but we didn't call it untracked until really we got to deep sky. So that's my interpretation, but I didn't think chat GPT's answer was bad in this case. It was perfectly fine. All right, that's it. We got through all the questions. Hopefully this was interesting for you all, or fun. It was fun for me just to see where this AI technology is at. It does a great job of sounding like a human. I think its confidence is interesting because it sounds confidently like a human, but you could see in a few of the answers, it got things a bit wrong. But because it sounds so natural and confident, it might be sort of a little bit dangerous because if people are using this technology irresponsibly, we're going to get some bad advice out there. At this point, I don't think I would use it for astrophotography advice, just because I think that there might be too much in there that would be a little bit misleading. I want to thank everyone who submitted questions for this video. They were all members of my Patreon community. And speaking of Patreon, you're now seeing everyone who supports me and this YouTube channel over on Patreon.com slash Nebula Photos. It is an excellent community of dedicated amateur astrophotographers, people who want to learn more. We have over 800 members now. There's an active Discord community you can get involved in. And I can't thank my Patreon community enough. I am now doing this full time thanks to all of you. And it really means the world to me to get that kind of support and allows me to make these videos and to really pursue what I want to do in life, which is help people learn astrophotography. So thank you to everyone who supports me on Patreon. And if you enjoy this channel, I think, you know, you can get a lot of benefits out of joining my Patreon community. It starts at just $1 a month and you get all kinds of support and a monthly Zoom call where you can ask me questions directly. We do a monthly imaging challenge, different objects every month. And you can see sort of people's different results. We pick a pick a couple winners every month. And so there's a lot of fun stuff going on. So if interested, head over to patreon.com slash Nebula Photos. Till next time, this has been Nico Carver. Happy holidays and clear skies.