Unusual Apollo pics, video and transcripts

reply to post by ppk55


I'm not following you at all. In a vacuum, all shadows have sharply defined edges, at whatever distance.

Is it possible the left image, used for the close ups could be a scale model.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/8246c9141737.jpg[/atsimg]

If so, could that explain why it looks so wrong ? I don't care what anyone says, that is wire mesh poking out. It's a model.

Could it also explain the amazing depth of field (focus) they achieved with those cameras with no viewfinders and only 3 settings for focus.

This is the work of a skilled photographer with time on their side.
The focus is way too precise.

I think it's more of a macro focus environment on a model.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/fbb7fc0107ba.jpg[/atsimg]

Is that deliberate obfuscating of the visor ?

sources: history.nasa.gov... history.nasa.gov...

[edit on 1-6-2010 by ppk55]

reply to post by ppk55


Hey ppk,

See how the dirt is stuck to the inside of the wheel?

But notice how none is stuck on/in the mesh tires. That is strange that the dust should cling to the flat vertical surface - even sometimes upside down as on the rims - but not the mesh...

[edit on 1-6-2010 by Exuberant1]

reply to post by ppk55


Why would someone take a close up photo of a scale model when they have a full sized one on hand?

reply to post by DJW001


Your brain cannot think of any reasons? At all?

reply to post by Exuberant1

Your brain cannot think of any reasons? At all?

No. Can yours? Give me one reason why someone would go through the complicated process of setting up a matching shot of a miniature when they have the full sized thing just sitting there.

Edit to correct typo.

[edit on 1-6-2010 by DJW001]

reply to post by ppk55


Do YOU actually know what depth of field is in the first place look at the depth of field scale on a lens that may help answer your questions I asked this before are you the person who claimed to be a cinematographer becuase if you are pictures and phortography seems to confuse you A LOT

www.photobert.com...

Look at picure above for that lens focus on around 20ft at f16 look at blue depth of field marks everything from just under 10ft to infinity is in focus at f22 if left most dpth of field marker for f22 was set to infinity everything down to 6 ft is in focus.

They had 3 focus settings and at the aperture used could have a good idea what would be in focus or NOT ANY AMATUER PHOTOGRAPHER knows how to use depth of field .

[edit on 1-6-2010 by wmd_2008]

If it's a scale model, then depth of field becomes crucial.
And that is what it appears to be based on all the examples above. A model.

Originally posted by ppk55
If so, could that explain why it looks so wrong ? I don't care what anyone says, that is wire mesh poking out. It's a model.

If you don't care what anyone says why are you asking?

This is the work of a skilled photographer with time on their side.
The focus is way too precise.

No, I can take photos without using any viewfinder, the only thing you need is a little practice.

I think it's more of a macro focus environment on a model.

It doesn't look like a model, if it was a model the dust must have also be at the same scale and the way the dust aggregates should also be at the same scale. Those natural things are always the ones that show that we are seeing is not at a 1:1 scale.

reply to post by ppk55


What makes you think its a scale MODEL still no answer to my other question I see so I will take it I am right!

Originally posted by wmd_2008
What makes you think its a scale MODEL

The missing bit of clamp (b) and the mesh tyre sticking out (c)

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/8246c9141737.jpg[/atsimg]

reply to post by ppk55


I thought we settled that last week. Please go back through the earlier posts. If there is something you still don't understand, please ask a specific question.

Originally posted by DJW001
I thought we settled that last week.

You may have thought it was settled, I believe based on the images above, it's a model.

Originally posted by ppk55

Originally posted by wmd_2008
What makes you think its a scale MODEL

The missing bit of clamp (b) and the mesh tyre sticking out (c)

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/8246c9141737.jpg[/atsimg]

Nothing missing and mesh tyre is not sticking out its because of the angle that the picture was taken YOU must be able to see that!

Originally posted by wmd_2008
mesh tyre is not sticking out

If it was a scale model, you could understand how someone could think the mesh tyre was protruding though couldn't you ?

Originally posted by ppk55

Originally posted by wmd_2008
mesh tyre is not sticking out

If it was a scale model, you could understand how someone could think the mesh tyre was protruding though couldn't you ?

If it was to scale then its a scale version of real life so real life size version would show the same

When looking for more images that might show models could have been used (see above), I came across this unrelated image from Apollo 15.

Something caught my eye at the bottom of the sun.
So I simply reduced the brightness and this was the result.

I honestly don't know what it is, but could it be a filament from a light bulb or a reflection of it? Looks a bit like one. I don't think it's an artifact from the low res image.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/09d7d1ea920d.jpg[/atsimg]

Here is the original. I sourced the image from the Apollo image atlas www.lpi.usra.edu...
On this site, their photos aren't blown out as much as the other sources.

eg. history.nasa.gov...

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/5abfa70613fd.jpg[/atsimg]

Interesting huh.

Originally posted by ppk55
Something caught my eye at the bottom of the sun.
So I simply reduced the brightness and this was the result.

I reduced the brightness... I didn't get that as a result. Could you write out the steps of what exactly you did to the image?

Originally posted by ppk55
I honestly don't know what it is, but could it be a filament from a light bulb or a reflection of it? Looks a bit like one. I don't think it's an artifact from the low res image.

Considering that it only appears on the lower resolution image and not in the other two versions I looked at, I think it's an artefact from the way the image was resized and had its contrast changed.

JRA, sorry I also used contrast to max, brightness all the way down on photoshop.

ArMaP, it could be because of the lower res, but the site I found it on is the only source where images are not over exposed. I have to say, if it's not a light bulb filament, it's a very strange looking artifact, one I haven't seen before.