John Lear's Moon Pictures on ATS, page 116
Pages: <<  113    114    115    116    117    118    119  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 123 times


reply posted on 17-3-2007 @ 10:29 AM by IronDogg
Originally posted by ArMaP
I do not consider myself an expert, but I do know that the shape of a shadow does not depend only on the shape of the object casting the shadow, it depends on the surface where the shadow is cast and the relation between that surface and the place from where we see the shadow.

A cylinder lying on the ground with the light shining perpendicular to the longer axis casts a rectangular shadow.

I will try to show what I mean with some examples.

This was the best I could do in some minutes.


As you can see, the shadow looks "normal" in this photo. That is because the surface where the shadow is projected is flat.


In this one, because the surface where the shadow is projected is not flat the shadow changes shape. This was the best I could do to try to make a rectangular shadow, to do a better job I would need something more flexible than paper to create that surface and probably take the picture from a different angle.


In this you can see that the shape of the shadow can be almost anything, the object has remained the same but the surface where the shadow is projected is different, giving a different shadow.

This is why I never trust shadows to try to see the shape of and object, unless I am sure of the characteristics of the surface where the shadow is cast.


Awesome job with that example ArMap! I was thinking the exact same with the surface angles/light source stuff... I was wanting to do something similiar, but I didn't have the "imagination" to do al that this morning... Very good job with your "simple" example though. You get the point across very definitively...


reply posted on 17-3-2007 @ 01:20 PM by ArMaP
Originally posted by zorgon
Oh and NASA calls this one "House Rock"

"View of House Rock from John's Station 11 pan. Smoky Mountain in the background."

That "House Rock" is bigger than it looks, at least to me.


Fendell is now looking at House Rock. This boulder is 12 meters tall and has lateral dimensions of 16 by 20 meters. Near the boulder, the surface slopes down toward the north and, consequently, we are not seeing the full vertical extent. The southwest flank of Smoky Mountain is the background and the slope is littered with boulders ejected from North Ray.
source (scroll down until you reach 166:50:14)

If that boulder is that large then the "cylinder" must be big as well.

There is at least one more photo with this "cylinder", this one.

The astronauts did some work on the "House Rock", so they were very close to the "cylinder". Apparently they did not think it worth of study or did not saw it as we see on those photos.



reply posted on 17-3-2007 @ 03:59 PM by zorgon


The "machine parts" or "cylinder" are very grainy and hard to detail in this image. I would really like to have the original full resolution .tiff file for this one. Isn't it curious that you can get them for some photos, but not the ones of interest to us? Hmmm...

Papajake made a comment about subject matter in the photos...


posted by papajake on 17-3-2007 at 02:15
"Also, what is the subject matter in the original photo? (AS16-116-18603) If you're going to travel 250,000 miles away from home, you'd sure better have a good subject matter in your lens when taking photos. This photo, at first glance, just looks like a bunch of rocks. But something is very off here, in my opinion."


This is a very important observation. The image at the top of the page certainly looks like the photograph is centered on the anomaly. But in the second image provided by ArMap we have House Rock on the left, the Astronaut on the right, and we are STILL centered on the anomaly, though this version is to grainy to hep us much.

Clarification: I had originally called the first photo "House Rock", but the anomaly is only near "House Rock", which is the 12 meter high round white rock in the image below.

Seems the astronaut is also easily confused... {from your reference)

166:50:14 Duke: Okay, Tony. The inside...(Stops to listen) It really is. I see no bedrock, though. All I see is boulders around the crater. There's nothing that reminds me of bedding, just loose boulders. Though it might very well be that it's so shocked that there could be real boulders...I mean, real bedrock there.


And these guys get paid for this? So a 12 meter tall round boulder was ejected from the crater... neat trick



This is a clip from AS16-106-17340HR.jpg. I gotta tell you though the pose in THAT (see full size) picture looks goofy... And that rock still doesn't look 12 meters tall feet maybe, but not meters..

While looking at the new images, I spotted a curiosity in the helmet reflection that I think is noteworthy...



Awaiting Comments.....



[edit on 17-3-2007 by zorgon]

[edit on 17-3-2007 by zorgon]


reply posted on 17-3-2007 @ 04:05 PM by IronDogg
Originally posted by zorgon
While looking at the new images, I spotted a curiosity in the helmet reflection that I think is noteworthy...



Awaiting Comments.....


Yeah, I noticed that too Zorgon, but I passed it off as the shadow is that of the Astronaut right there, and the photographer is the dude standing way in the background of the reflection... At least that is the way the shadows look to me aren't they? If that shadow was that of the photographer, wouldn't his shadow be contradictory with the shadows in the rest of the picture? It looks to me like the astronaut pictured is looking down, so his curved glass piece is reflecting his own shadow right off the ground, no?

[edit on 3-17-2007 by IronDogg]


reply posted on 17-3-2007 @ 04:49 PM by zorgon
Here is the tools they used on Apollo missions...

The core sampler is very narrow... So nice try but no cigar



Here is the variety of camera equipment. It seems we only get to see images from certain cameras, not all of them. I wonder why that is...





reply posted on 17-3-2007 @ 05:27 PM by IronDogg
Originally posted by zorgon
Here is the tools they used on Apollo missions...

The core sampler is very narrow... So nice try but no cigar



Aghhh... You beat me to it... I did find some similiar photos I was going to post of basically the same tools. They did have some bigger core samplers but the biggest was still only 4 cm inside diameter... Thanks Zorgon for eliminating that explanation...

In my searches for tools though I came across this similiar photo of the shadow photo above... I think this is similiar in the respect of the shadow at his feet, the astroanaut looking down, and the reflection of the photographer in the background of the reflection. Do you think this photo is similiar in explaining the possible positions of the shadow, and the reflections? Sorry to not provide a "zoom in".




reply posted on 18-3-2007 @ 12:02 AM by jra
Originally posted by zorgon
Here is the variety of camera equipment. It seems we only get to see images from certain cameras, not all of them. I wonder why that is...


Why do you believe that you've only seen images from certain camera's? All the images from all those camera's are publicly available. What photos from which camera's haven't you seen?

EDIT to add: You asked if Apollo 16 did core samples. The answer is yes. All of the missions collected core samples except for Apollo 14 as far as I can tell.

EDIT 2: I only meant to reply about the camera thing originally, but I'm find more things I can give you answers for now. But anyway...

One thing that gets me in all these clips is that they appear to be struggling more with gravity than I would expect in 1/6th G. In one clip Houston suggests they turn over a large rock and they answer "no way"


Things may weight less on the Moon, but objects will still have the same mass. An astronaut in his suit will weight up to about ~300lbs on Earth, on the Moon, he'll only be ~50lbs, but his mass will still be 300lbs. So it can still take a fair bit of effort on their part. For example, when in 0G, an astronaut can't push the Shuttle around, because its mass is too great even though they are in 0G and it weighs nothing. That and the space suit is also fairly stiff, so it can be hard to bend and move around too.

Also if I remember correctly. The astronauts found it harder to slow down if they needed to stop suddenly when they got their forward momentum going at a decent speed. Because they'd build up speed and if you wanted to stop suddenly, you'd have to apply a lot of force to stop your 300lbs of mass wanting to continue in its current direction. Make sense?

[edit on 18-3-2007 by jra]
Pages: <<  113    114    115    116    117    118    119  >>    ^^TOP^^



"My God, its full of stars!"
  Posted 15 days ago with 83 member flags
Newfound "super-Earth"
  Posted 4 days ago with 55 member flags
Toronto teens send Lego man into space: video
  Posted 12 days ago with 28 member flags
Amazing new photo of Earth. The Blue Marble 2012
  Posted 9 days ago with 21 member flags
Russia proposes international Moon base-- again!
  Posted 17 days ago with 20 member flags
NASA Probe Captures 1st Video of Moon\'s Far Side
  Posted 5 days ago with 19 member flags