Well -- maybe you didn't count the ones near the end of the film magazine, but if they were poorly centered pictures, I counted them. It shouldn't matter whether it was a poorly centered picture taken towards the end of a film magazine in the middle of the magazine.

And so on most of the rolls of film, the first frame and the last four or five frames will have streaks, spots, blurs, and other symptoms of light leaking into the magazine when it wasn't attached to a camera.

Conrad - "We practiced this...I started out by just laying rocks around on the floor. One of the things was setting the camera deal; we had the three (focus) distances. And what we did was actually take pictures to calibrate ourselves. They developed that film in training to make sure we stood the right distance."

Bean - "We had to point that (chest-mounted) camera without a viewfinder. (But) we didn't miss a (single) one on the Moon, I don't think."

Conrad - "Yeah, and it was due to the training. We really worked hard at learning to estimate by eye what the camera settings had to be."

Bean - "The first ones (we took in training) weren't very good. But on the Moon, they were all good. So we really had learned in training how to do it by using real film, having it developed, having it debriefed. I think that's why the photography got better with each mission, in general. Because the photographers would impart the (experience gained on a mission) to the next crew and help them be better. So they did get better. And I thought the photography did too."

Factor time: All in all a Hasselblad 500 EL is absolutely unsuitable for fotos under pressure of time because with a Hasselblad 500 EL much consideration and time is needed for a good foto, but a "moon walk" lasts only some hours

Originally posted by captiva
If you look at the original 5903 at

www.lpi.usra.edu...

Theres something missing...the photographer.

The shadow on the visor is that of the subject....anyone explain that please?

I own a Hasselblad 500 C/M. It has a ground glass framing element on the top, not the back of the body. The astronauts would simply have to look down to see at least part of the image if not all of it, making composition a fairly simple process.

Additionally, considering they are constantly bathed in the brightest of sunlight, the cameras would easily have been preset with a very small f-stop and a predictable exposure setting...the light source would never change in intensity after all.

Good:
The Moon's surface is airless. On Earth, our thick atmosphere scatters sunlight, spreading it out over the whole sky. That's why the sky is bright during the day. Without sunlight, the air is dark at night, allowing us to see stars. On the Moon, the lack of air means that the sky is dark. Even when the Sun is high off the horizon during full day, the sky near it will be black. If you were standing on the Moon, you would indeed see stars, even during the day.