Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Remastered and stabilised film of Apollo 16 Lunar Rover.

page: 5
43
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 06:14 AM
link   

Blue Shift
Just makes me think that those astronauts were complete maniacs. Look at how fast they're driving over rocky terrain that could sink them at any moment.

Absolutely nuts.

That's what I thought too. Total joy ride.




posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 06:16 AM
link   

DiscordianJism
reply to post by smurfy
 


More evidence that it never took place. If you play the video slightly faster, it just looks like a 4 wheeler driving around in the desert. The gravity is identical as Earth's, the motion is just slowed down slightly. I call BS.


Oh behave. Don't derail the thread with that childish nonsense.



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 06:32 AM
link   

Baddogma
Moon landing hoax believers seem to be covering up a self perceived lack by negating the accomplishments of others.

Just because someone doesn't understand something, doesn't mean the thing that is not understood doesn't exist.

As for the comment that the (very very cool btw) film seems "wrong," well, it seems "off" because it was taken in 1/6 gravity and in a near vacuum. That makes it "off" compared to film, or video, taken on Earth. See?

I was about three when those guys first got there. I was awakened by my dad and placed in front of the old RCA color TV console and told to "remember this... this is history happening. We made it to the moon!"

And I still do remember it... thanks dad. Pretty damned cool.


I was twelve and we watched it on TV at school. They didn't have enough tv's so they crammed several classes in each room to make sure we all saw it. It was on the news again that evening and I watched it at home too.
I was so proud to be an American that day.



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 07:49 AM
link   
reply to post by phantomlord
 


So you have a DSLR my shots above were taken with one, surely you must know on your night landscape shots if you expose for the Moon no stars and if you expose for the stars the Moon ends up a burned out blob we know the settings used for the Hasselblad images the Astronauts took and we have the spec for the movie camera so we actually do know how the shots were taken.



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 08:03 AM
link   
A quick search would have shown you that this was posted over a year ago already.. The thread title is almost exactly the same..

Same Thread 1 Year Ago
edit on 20-12-2013 by ZiggyMojo because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 08:14 AM
link   

BaddogmaI was about three when those guys first got there. I was awakened by my dad and placed in front of the old RCA color TV console and told to "remember this... this is history happening. We made it to the moon!"

And I still do remember it... thanks dad. Pretty damned cool.


That is a cool moment. I turned 13 at the time and Apollo 11 lifted off on my birthday. I was glued to the TV the whole time and watched every minute of every moon shot possible. The only time I ever skipped school was to watch a moon walk.

Great memories and a great time to be American. What a contrast to today's world. It makes me sad that we peaked in the 70's.



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 08:20 AM
link   

AutumnWitch657

Blue Shift
Just makes me think that those astronauts were complete maniacs. Look at how fast they're driving over rocky terrain that could sink them at any moment.

Absolutely nuts.

That's what I thought too. Total joy ride.


There's a longer version of this video on Youtube, sorry can't remember the exact title, but something like "Apollo 17: Nothing So Hidden". In it you will see that this was a test for the rover. They wanted to get a feel for how it would work on the moon.



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 08:21 AM
link   
funny how the dust kicked up looks just like it does on earth



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 08:22 AM
link   

smurfy
A remastered short clip of the Apollo 16 rover. So amazing a quality, you could almost be there. I hope more old space film will be done like this!



Dam!!!! That is a some SOLID CGI right there



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 09:29 AM
link   
reply to post by smurfy
 


The moon has gravity? like really? Why isn't the buggy jumping like astronauts? Location: Earth?

Judging by the texts above, this is not a record on location: the Moon, what were some thinking..
edit on 20-12-2013 by ImpactoR because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 09:39 AM
link   
I just cannot fathom how anyone can watch that footage and actually believe it's filmed on the moon.
I believe we went to the moon after that, maybe even around that time, but there is no way the footage shown in the OP or any of the footage of that mission is solely filmed on the moon.
It's either a mix of faked/real or it's all fake



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 11:19 AM
link   
reply to post by AutumnWitch657
 


i am currently watching the movie Apollo 18. When the boys take out the moon buggy the footage is about 90% the exact same footage seen here. What do you think of that? Did the movie use this footage or is this footage just taken from the movie.



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 01:03 PM
link   

AntiNWO

AutumnWitch657

Blue Shift
Just makes me think that those astronauts were complete maniacs. Look at how fast they're driving over rocky terrain that could sink them at any moment.

Absolutely nuts.

That's what I thought too. Total joy ride.


There's a longer version of this video on Youtube, sorry can't remember the exact title, but something like "Apollo 17: Nothing So Hidden". In it you will see that this was a test for the rover. They wanted to get a feel for how it would work on the moon.


This is Apollo 16, you can see the same sequences, and here taken from NASA website, before they were breathed on, and it is all footage from the Apollo 16 mission, not a test. Go to around 17 minutes in.


edit on 20-12-2013 by smurfy because: Text.



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 01:17 PM
link   

ZiggyMojo
A quick search would have shown you that this was posted over a year ago already.. The thread title is almost exactly the same..

Same Thread 1 Year Ago
edit on 20-12-2013 by ZiggyMojo because: (no reason given)


Yes, that is the same channel from August 2010. A quick look at the title for this thread, and so used in my search, would have shown you it is a dissimilar title. In any case, it appears the footage is new to lads and lassies here, so I'm only too glad to have posted the link, same as I expect you would have been when you posted your thread.



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 01:19 PM
link   
I thought that space was a vacuum how do they keep breathable air in the space suit without it blowing up. Take a tied balloon put it in a bell jar then suck the air out , the balloon will blow up. Probably a stupid question but just curious.



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 01:30 PM
link   

ImpactoR
reply to post by smurfy
 


The moon has gravity? like really? Why isn't the buggy jumping like astronauts? Location: Earth?

Judging by the texts above, this is not a record on location: the Moon, what were some thinking..
edit on 20-12-2013 by ImpactoR because: (no reason given)


The original footage is above, in it you can even catch the rover doing a little wheely. BTW, You should really know that all bodies have gravity.
So we know Apollo 11 went to the Moon, why not then Apollo 16? Because it had a buggy? and that would be too farfetched?



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 02:38 PM
link   

LDragonFire
funny how the dust kicked up looks just like it does on earth

No it doesn't. Watch what happens to dust on Earth:

edit on 20-12-2013 by wildespace because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 02:47 PM
link   

DeepVisions
I feel like the dust should stay in the air a little longer with the reduced gravity. It does seem kind of fake now that it's stabilized. Is this video playing at normal speed or is it sped up?


That's interesting because I thought the same thing.
Given the much lower gravity shouldn't the dust remain airborne longer than on Earth.
The falling dust looks exactly like it would behave down here.



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 03:01 PM
link   

Asktheanimals

DeepVisions
I feel like the dust should stay in the air a little longer with the reduced gravity. It does seem kind of fake now that it's stabilized. Is this video playing at normal speed or is it sped up?


That's interesting because I thought the same thing.
Given the much lower gravity shouldn't the dust remain airborne longer than on Earth.
The falling dust looks exactly like it would behave down here.


There is some caveat as regards speed. You can see in the playback of the NASA footage, of the whole of the Apollo mission, and including the thread segment, it is painfully slow, much slower than the thread segment, but that still could an artifact of the scanning. Once the 16mm film is digitized, the playback can be faster or slower, Maybe that's to do with compression, I don't know. The only way to compare as I see it, is to be able to view the original 16mm film beside the digital version.
Here's some info from a scanning firm,

" HOW MUCH FILM FITS ON ONE ONE-HOUR DVD AND WHAT TYPE OF FILM DO I HAVE?
16mm Film 1600 feet

At Memory Keepers, we collect individual frames and then use the appropriate frame rate to obtain the proper playback rate based on the film type. Some providers run their equipment at a fixed frame rate while capturing video on the fly. This means the playback speed of your final video can be too slow or too fast.

Please note that 16mm film was typically filmed at 18 frames per second (fps); however, it's not uncommon that the film was shot using 15fps or even 12 fps. We will use our best judgement to pick the right speed. Should we drop down to something lower than 18 fps then we will get less than 1600 feet on one DVD. "

So it's all down to who did what in the scanning process. A link to Memory Keepers,

www.memorykeepersonline.com...

edit on 20-12-2013 by smurfy because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 21 2013 @ 01:16 AM
link   

Asktheanimals

DeepVisions
I feel like the dust should stay in the air a little longer with the reduced gravity. It does seem kind of fake now that it's stabilized. Is this video playing at normal speed or is it sped up?


That's interesting because I thought the same thing.
Given the much lower gravity shouldn't the dust remain airborne longer than on Earth.
The falling dust looks exactly like it would behave down here.


I've emboldened where you're going wrong!

There is no air, which means dust falls straight back down.






top topics



 
43
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join