It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

And again, were they really on the MOON??

page: 3
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 10 2004 @ 09:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by jra
There are many photos of the LRV having tracks behind them.

www.hq.nasa.gov...

www.hq.nasa.gov...

161.115.184.211...

go here for more great images: www.apolloarchive.com...



mepatriot: It's not suspicious at all. NASA moved onto other things, they developed the shuttle, which can't even get up that high let alone leave Earth orbit. NASA has nothing to get back to the moon with, thus the reason why we haven't been back in so long. Not to mention the money involved which NASA has also been lacking these days.


No stars...


Not even one...



posted on May, 10 2004 @ 09:07 AM
link   
On the picture the light seem to come from everywhere. There is no halo of a spot light. The light look like a natural light. But : we dont see the sun, and if it was the sun, the pix should be over-exposed.

Enlight me...



posted on May, 10 2004 @ 09:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nans DESMICHELS
But : we dont see the sun, and if it was the sun, the pix should be over-exposed.

Enlight me...


You can set exposure levels on cameras. You can also use different kinds of film that are better suited to different light conditions.



posted on May, 10 2004 @ 09:57 AM
link   
Nans DESMICHELS, did you expect it to look like the set of a Hollywood movie?

Have you ever taken a photography class?

Have you ever used a camera more sophisticated than a simple point and shoot (or if you are old enough to remember the moon landings in person, do you remember the Kodak instamatic with the drop in cartridges and flash cubes?)

The reason you cant see stars is because the sun light reflecting off the foreground objects (the light grey lunar soil, the white lander, suits and other equipment, etc.) is too bright relative to the starlight. If you were to adjust the exposure to be able to see the stars the foreground objects would be overexposed.



posted on May, 10 2004 @ 10:03 AM
link   
You just answered your own question Nans.

The sun is behind the person taking the photograph. The exposure is way down because the light is so bright (much brighter than Daytime on Earth) so as not to over-expose the image. As such the exposure is far too low to pick up any stars. They just cant compete against the brightness of the foreground.




top topics
 
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join