Gregg and all others must not apologize for their photos show no star trails. He has done a very great job. Your opinion is sufficiently known. Accepted. But your constant repetitions make your attitude no better. I wish you that you will one day live with these images. Youll see in the future.
To live is to accept the reality not the unreality, the younger generation I would like to live real images, not mere creations of the computer. Science is reality, art is creativity ... not mix these two good opportunities of mind.
From what reality are you talking about? Startrails? Is there in the cosmos?
For the observers eye in the telescope colorful comets?
I would be interested what you accept as reality?
Includes your rules all aspects of comets Photography?
Not only the movement in the sky, even the expansion of the tail?
How long do you think may expose you to more to get a real picture. Exciting questions to a critical spirit.
Briefly, I consider photographic reality when exposed for a maximum time within which the comet is still firm (and this depends on the apparent speed of the comet itself). If we separate the same exposure in two separate (comet a- b fixed-fixed star) and then reassemble the computer, then this is certainly a montage. Beautiful, artistic, fantastic and I would say not real ... although well finished at the sight! From astronomical picture becomes a computer graphics processing, where the time spent at the PC is much longer than that spent at astrographic tool. More graphic-mathematical algorithms painting, more aesthetic beauty, but less, much less actually!