• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged Apollo "hoax" discussion - continuation thread

Anders Lindman said:
They didn't have Photoshop back then. How to airbrush for beginners -- www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5nRNcNM16g
Click to expand...

I didn't say anything about Photoshop. I'm not a novice at airbrushing; I own several.

None of that is relevant to my post. I asked you what you claim has been airbrushed. I asked you why you would use an airbrush to do whatever it is you claimed had been done, not how to use an airbrush in general. I'm not asking to be informed. I'm asking you to demonstrate that you know what you're talking about.

Will you be answering the questions I actually asked?
 
JayUtah said:
I'm not a novice at airbrushing; I own several.
Click to expand...
1 hour cleaning, five minutes trying to spray, another hour pulling it apart to find the problem. All this followed by twenty years of practice to get realistic results. .....but when they work....they are a beautiful old technology.
 
JayUtah said:
I didn't say anything about Photoshop. I'm not a novice at airbrushing; I own several.

None of that is relevant to my post. I asked you what you claim has been airbrushed. I asked you why you would use an airbrush to do whatever it is you claimed had been done, not how to use an airbrush in general. I'm not asking to be informed. I'm asking you to demonstrate that you know what you're talking about.

Will you be answering the questions I actually asked?
Click to expand...

"Airbrushing has long been used to alter photographs in the pre-digital era." -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbrush#Photo_retouching
 
Which says nothing about the Apollo photographic record, now, does it? We all know what photo retouching is. If your claim is that the entire photographic record of the Apollo missions on the moon has been faked with airbrushing, I suggest you click the links on my .sig and find which ones and why you think they're airbrushed.

Don't forget, assertions are not proof.
 
ApolloGnomon said:
Which says nothing about the Apollo photographic record, now, does it? We all know what photo retouching is. If your claim is that the entire photographic record of the Apollo missions on the moon has been faked with airbrushing, I suggest you click the links on my .sig and find which ones and why you think they're airbrushed.

Don't forget, assertions are not proof.
Click to expand...

2s93knb.jpg


The smooth horizon is what you would get with airbrushing. Of course, the same thing can be achieved digitally today, so don't let my crude handiwork in the other image fool you.

I claim that they used ordinary Earth landscapes in addition to studio settings and airbrushed in a black background over the Earth sky. To make the Earth sand look moon-like they used black-and-white film for the sand and pasted in color details in the foreground.

Possible technique used: When taking a photo they used two cameras, one loaded with black-and-white film, and the the other loaded with color film. When taking a picture, both cameras took a snapshot of the same scene. And for the composite image, they used the black-and-white photo for the background and cut color foreground objects, like astronauts and the flag from the color photo and pasted it in onto the background photo. Then they airbrushed in a black sky.

ETA: Or they used only color film, and developed a color copy and a black-and-white copy from the same negative.
 
Last edited:
Didn't I just say "assertions are not proof?" A smooth horizon is also what you get by shooting a photograph of terrain.
 
Anders Lindman said:
[qimg]http://i44.tinypic.com/2s93knb.jpg[/qimg]

The smooth horizon is what you would get with airbrushing. Of course, the same thing can be achieved digitally today, so don't let my crude handiwork in the other image fool you.
Click to expand...

Phew - thanks for the heads up...

I claim that they used ordinary Earth landscapes in addition to studio settings and airbrushed in a black background over the Earth sky. To make the Earth sand look moon-like they used black-and-white film for the sand and pasted in color details in the foreground.

Possible technique used: When taking a photo they used two cameras, one loaded with black-and-white film, and the the other loaded with color film. When taking a picture, both cameras took a snapshot of the same scene. And for the composite image, they used the black-and-white photo for the background and cut color foreground objects, like astronauts and the flag from the color photo and pasted it in onto the background photo. Then they airbrushed in a black sky.

ETA: Or they used only color film, and developed a color copy and a black-and-white copy from the same negative.
Click to expand...

'Cut and paste' you say? With no visible trace of the superimposed layer?

Hundreds of photographs, all done to an identical standard and all publicly available within a week of returning to Earth. Did they have an army of photographers and airbrushers? Who were they? Where did they work? Where was the studio? Who built it? Who guarded it? Who operated the lights? How did they airbrush in details that could not have been known about without being on the moon?

You missed out the simpler option - they went to the moon.
 
Where`s the assertion that China faked a moon landing, rather than the USA?
 
Matthew Ellard said:
1 hour cleaning, five minutes trying to spray, another hour pulling it apart to find the problem. All this followed by twenty years of practice to get realistic results. .....but when they work....they are a beautiful old technology.
Click to expand...

You need to switch to Aztek!
 
Andres. Why would an Airbrush be used? When I was taught how to retouch I spent most of my time with a very fine spotting brush, magnifying glass and a scalpel for scraping.

If Nasa faked it on Earth why are the moonscapes exactly the same as those taken by other countries landers?

Are they all still in on the Hoax?
 
Last edited:
Captain_Swoop said:
Andres. Why would an Airbrush be used? When I was taught how to retouch I spent most of my time with a very fine spotting brush, magnifying glass and a scalpel for scraping.
Click to expand...

Where I was going with my question to him. I too have retouched in the film world, and it almost never requires an airbrush.
 
Anders Lindman said:
The smooth horizon is what you would get with airbrushing.
Click to expand...

No.

I claim that they used ordinary Earth landscapes in addition to studio settings...
Click to expand...

Asked and answered.

...and airbrushed in a black background over the Earth sky.
Click to expand...

The stupidest possible way to attempt to "black out" a portion of an image.

To make the Earth sand look moon-like they used black-and-white film for the sand and pasted in color details in the foreground.
Click to expand...

Except that the background isn't really in black-and-white, just in undersaturated color.

Possible technique used:...
Click to expand...

Parallax dooms this technique.

ETA: Or they used only color film, and developed a color copy and a black-and-white copy from the same negative.
Click to expand...

The color Apollo images are on reversal film.
 
Where I was going with my question to him. I too have retouched in the film world, and it almost never requires an airbrush.
Click to expand...
Even for 8x10 negatives using an airbrush would be like painting your fingernails with a can of Krylon.
 
Airbrushing a negative to "black out" sky?

Now there's a stundie if ever I saw one!! Makes me wonder if anders has ever actually seen a negative or understands how they work!!

Here's a clue for you anders, so that you avoid making a complete ass of yourself in future...

593px-Aldrin_with_experiment.jpg
 
Anders Lindman said:
"Airbrushing has long been used to alter photographs in the pre-digital era." --
Click to expand...
Phew! There's a challenge. Airbrushing 2,000,000 16mm film frames to fake moon landing footage. That guy must be the best and fastest airbrush artist in the entire universe!


Captain Swoop said:
You need to switch to Aztek!
Click to expand...
I use an Aztek double action, Tamiya acrylics and thinners. Unless a white dove sits in the tree in the backyard, the augers will be wrong and the bloody Aztek will splatter, spit water, blow Dunkel Gelb back into my eyes, bubble in the cup or spray at 45 degrees to where I'm aiming.
 
I have an Iwata top-cup. I'm no good with it. I know just enough about airbrushing to be very impressed by good airbrushing. The Apollo photographs have none of the characteristics of airbrushing, good or bad.
 
The only reason conspiracy theories are necessary is because they provide an alternate explanation when the original one cannot pass the mustard test.

1. The Moon Landing. It was well known the Soviets were ahead in the space program and America was lagging behind. The only way to beat the Soviets was to put the American space program of steroids. So all those involved in promoting the space race took them and made a movie of an American astronaut sprinting across the moon surface.

2. JFK assassination. JFK threatened the Soviets to stop their missile shipment to Cuba. or face nuclear retaliation. The Soviets had a simpler way to deal with JFK's belligerent behavior. They hired an assassin and armed him with a $10 rifle to proved there was no need for an escalated nuclear war. That even the leader of the free world's head pops when struck by a 10 cent bullet. It put an end to the nuclear Armageddon at a substantially lower cost.

3. 9/11 attack. Christians have been praying for the second coming of Christ for centuries. A final battle is to take place in the middle-east between the forces of good and evil. Catastrophic destruction and carnage is to be brought upon the region. The Jews and Muslims collaborated to move the battle scene a little closer to the American people looking forward to Armageddon and picked New York to give them a taste of what they were wishing for. Like they say...Be careful what you wish for.

I have many more alternate explanations and none of them are conspiracy theories, they don't have to be.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom