Apollo 11 Moon Landing Revisited: Hoax ~vs~ Debunk

[Vixen]

What is your source for this allegedly official classification?

Sorry, I misread it. It is to be sealed until 2076. Hmmm. Presumably they don't want children's sticky fingers all over it.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

As for usable photos it's all a moot question as the gelatin in the film would almost certainly have been damaged by radiation.

I look forward to seeing your calculations for this, as you're a numbers person.

 

[Vixen]

That's not the question. The question is whether the light from the sun is shining as brightly on objects in a lunar scene as it is on objects in an Earth scene, such that similar photographic settings would be required.

"Glare" is irrelevant. Temperature is irrelevant.

Glare is very relevant as it was also coming off the ground.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Sorry, I misread it. It is to be sealed until 2076. Hmmm. Presumably they don't want children's sticky fingers all over it.

It's a schoolkids' time capsule.
You grasp the concept I suppose?

 

[Jack by the hedge]

The photos are staggeringly perfect.

Including the panorama series which have the sun glaring into some of them? Are they perfect too?

 

[JayUtah]

Glare is very relevant as it was also coming off the ground.

Yes, sunlight reflects off the lunar surface just as it does off the Earth's surface. Photography works by capturing light reflected from objects.

But you're trying posture glare and temperature as things that make the lunar environment markedly different than the Earth environment for photographic purposes. You're grasping at straws. None of what you allude to changes the parameters of the lighting problem.

Are the Apollo photographs consistent with photos taken with a high shutter speed (ca. 1/125 second) or are they consistent with photos taken at a long shutter speed, 15 seconds?

If I photograph a sunlit scene on ISO 160 film using a 15-second shutter speed at f/11, to what degree will the photo be overexposed?

 

[JayUtah]

Sorry, I misread it. It is to be sealed until 2076. Hmmm. Presumably they don't want children's sticky fingers all over it.

Time capsules are indeed sealed to prevent their contents from deterioration. That's how they work.

You're trying to make some amount of hay out of the notion that no one is allowed to see inside the remaining Apollo capsules. That's factually false. Almost nothing in the command module was ever classified and there is a huge wealth of information about them available to researchers and interested parties from any country.

 

[Steve]

It's a schoolkids' time capsule.
You grasp the concept I suppose?

Never assume.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Never assume.

Hence the question mark.

 

[Mojo]

If quality is key, then generally speaking, the more telescopic the lens, the lower the quality but OTOH you can get perfectly good pics however.

What does that have to do with whether you should use a zoom lens?

 

[Mojo]

The astronauts were there at a time it was at its most suitable for humans, i.e., circa 28°C, in other words, when the sun was very low. No different from sunset or sunrise, when one can often see the Moon in the sky even both Sun and Moon nearby each other. If there is glare, turn your back on the sun to take the pic.

I'll take that as a "no".

 

[Vixen]

We want to get it from you

I shan't be wasting my time arguing facts.

 

[Andy_Ross]

It seems she might be confusing a UV filter with a polarizing filter.

As I explained at length before, UV filters in the traditional sense are not needed on the Moon because the haze ("glare?") they are meant to correct is a phenomenon created in the atmosphere. Absent an atmosphere, you don't have the same problem.

A circular polarizing filter can eliminate reflections (specular or diffuse) by selectively admitting light of a certain polarity. Reflections are generally polarized in a different direction than the primary subject's illumination. Scattered visible light (not UV) in the air is also usually polarized differently. You can darken the sky, for example, using a circular polarizer.

Nothing about this has anything to do with ordinary star photography.

Again a good answer but not from Vixen.
No doubt it will be incorporated in to her next iteration.

 

[JayUtah]

I shan't be wasting my time arguing facts.

You haven't established that they are facts.

 

[Mojo]

Excellent reply but I was asking Vixen.
Now she knows

Are you sure?

 

[JayUtah]

Again a good answer but not from Vixen.
No doubt it will be incorporated in to her next iteration.

I wouldn't worry. Vixen rarely if ever incorporates things that she's told into the next iteration of her claims, so there's little danger in revealing facts she seems determined to ignore.

 

[Mojo]

It's 'classified'. This is official.

[citation needed]

 

[Foster Zygote]

The astronauts were there at a time it was at its most suitable for humans, i.e., circa 28°C, in other words, when the sun was very low. No different from sunset or sunrise, when one can often see the Moon in the sky even both Sun and Moon nearby each other. If there is glare, turn your back on the sun to take the pic.

Do you suppose the astronauts on the moon saw the moon in the sky?

Seriously, the only way out of the hole is to put down the spade.

 

[Andy_Ross]

You mean I crafted 200 iron daggers for nothing?!

Cut me some slack, I took an arrow to the knee!

 

[Mojo]

It's a schoolkids' time capsule.
You grasp the concept I suppose?