Faked/Retouched Images from apollo 15 ? You be the judge.

While viewing a few pictures from Apollo 15, these couple of images didnt seem right.

Take a look at the anomolies, cut outs, crops, reticule blurs and or images overlays.

Tell me what you think. I am sure there is a simple explanation.

http://www.phys.ncku.edu.tw/~astrolab/mirrors/apod/image/0401/hillpan_apollo1 5_big.jpg I wrapped the outer ends. Why does it look like the photo was cut do hide something.



In this next pictue you will see that behind the astronaut there is a device that has been cropped with the horizon. The rest of the pictures have many anomolies aswell. Can you spot the probs?

http://paranoid.dechengst.nl/apollo/Apollo%2015%20Station%206.jpg

[edit on 5-10-2008 by IvanZana]

[edit on 5-10-2008 by IvanZana]

[edit on 5-10-2008 by IvanZana]

[edit on 6-10-2008 by IvanZana]

[edit on 6-10-2008 by IvanZana]

You should look at the original images, not these panoramic shots that have been stitched together. The gaps are there because these are multiple photos put together to make one image. The computer has to bend and distort images to fit them together. Some times that doesn't work perfectly and you get some glitches, other times you get gaps, due to there not being enough photos to fill in those spots. There is no fakery or coverup going on in these images.

Go to this site: www.apolloarchive.com... and look at the normal versions.

Originally posted by jra
these panoramic shots that have been stitched together. The gaps are there because these are multiple photos put together to make one image. The computer has to bend and distort images to fit them together.
Go to this site: www.apolloarchive.com... and look at the normal versions.

Your wrong. In the second picture it is a panoramic aswell. As you can see the cropping in the 1st photo which is in grey is not the usual tiling and cutting you see in panoramics like the second picture provided.


Can you provide another example of your version of a 1971 computerized photo editing procedure that produced the 1st picture 'grey out area'?

What do you think of the second shot? The object behind the astonaut?
the multiple reticules?

Thanx for your opinion tho.

[edit on 6-10-2008 by IvanZana]

What I find extremely odd about all of the Apollo missions photographs taken on the moon is the fact they never went anywhere near the mountains! The mountains in the pictures are always way off in the distance forming, if you like, a picturesque backdrop. As far as I can tell no picture has the astronauts approaching or nearing the large hills and mountains. They are always, always off in the distance. Why? Were astronauts only allowed to walk on the relatively flat and even areas of the moon? Where they asthmatics and not able to walk up hill?

reply to post by IvanZana


jra is right...the original photos are there for everyone to look at. Don't blame NASA for another party's poor cropping job. That cropped panorama was probably put together for someone's book, and they wanted it to "look pretty".

Are they cropped and pasted? Sure. Were things "cropped out" of the photo? Yes. However, this wasn't done as part of a conspiracy. It was done because someone thought their final cropped picture "looked better" than the originals.

That's why they completely blacked out the sky above the astronout, when actually that part of the photo contained lens flare. While they artificuially blacked out the sky, they also cut off some of the equopment sticking above the horizon (I think that equipment is a camara mounted to the rover).

If you want to see the actual pictures that were used to make this panorama, I linked them below (the final one listed is the one with the astronaut):

history.nasa.gov...
history.nasa.gov...
history.nasa.gov...
history.nasa.gov...
history.nasa.gov...
history.nasa.gov...
history.nasa.gov...

reply to post by Mintwithahole.


Limited time/resources? More interesting things to do? The mountains were pretty far away from the LZ.



[edit on 6-10-2008 by Phage]

reply to post by Mintwithahole.


The Apollo astronauts' landing sites were in broad flat plains relatively far from mountains, for obvious safety reasons. This gave them a huge target for a landing site and plenty of margin for error.

However, for the final three missions they had rovers that could carry them on excursions to the distant mountains.

Here is a photo from Apollo 17 taken on a mountainside:
history.nasa.gov...

Here are other Apollo 17 photos taken from the tops of hills and mountians:
history.nasa.gov...
history.nasa.gov...


[edit on 10/6/2008 by Soylent Green Is People]

reply to post by Phage

"
Limited time/resources? More interesting things to do? The mountains were pretty far away from the LZ.
"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for taking a moment out from your incredibly busy schedule! However it doesn't answer my original question which was why NASA never targeted the mountains?
Please dont bother replying because I don't want to distract you any further from your important business! carry on massaging that ego!

reply to post by Mintwithahole.


I believe Phage meant that the ASTRONAUTS had limited time/resources, i.e., he was answering your question.

...And I showed you pictures taken from mountains and taken of mountains from Apollo 17. Here is a link to Apollo 17's traverse map that shows they took the rover to the mountains:
www.lpi.usra.edu...

and the traverse map from Apollo 16:
www.lpi.usra.edu...

Apollo 15 probably didn't venture too far from the landing site since it was the first time they used the rover, and they probably didn't have enough confidence in the rover to go on a long excursion to the mountains (I'm just speculating here).

[edit on 10/6/2008 by Soylent Green Is People]

Here is image AS17-141-21599 from the Apollo 17 mission which shows astronaut Gene Cernan at station 6, at the base of the big North Massif. So the astonauts did SOME climbing, even though they obviously didn't try to reach the top of the massif.




Link to image at the Apollo Lunar Surface Journal:
www.hq.nasa.gov...

Originally posted by IvanZana
Can you provide another example of your version of a 1971 computerized photo editing procedure that produced the 1st picture 'grey out area'?

I never said it was done in the 70's. These panoramic shots were put together quite recently.

What do you think of the second shot? The object behind the astonaut?
the multiple reticules?

The object is the low-gain antenna on the Lunar Rover. You can see it more clearly in the original.

[edit on 7-10-2008 by jra]

first.. right off the bat .. there is 2 different lighting sources. It's totally obvious! and I'm a Armature!!!

why are they 2 lighting sources on the moon and how can 1 light source be brighter than the sun ? ??

reply to post by Komodo


OK. I'll bite...
...Please explain why you say there are two light sources.

[edit on 10/7/2008 by Soylent Green Is People]

Originally posted by Komodo
first.. right off the bat .. there is 2 different lighting sources. It's totally obvious! and I'm a Armature!!!

Remember, this is a 360 degree panorama. Every photo was taken at a different angle. There is only one light source, if there were two, then every object would be casting two shadows, which they clearly are not.

reply to post by jra


Ahhhh. That probably is Komodo's issue -- the fact that the sun AND the astronaut's shadow are seemingly both in front of the astronaut.

However, as you said, this is a 360 degree panorama built from a mosaic of pictures. Therefore the sun is actually behind the astronaut in the "mosaic tile photo" of the astronaut casting the shadow. Thank's jra.

[edit on 10/7/2008 by Soylent Green Is People]