Who took this photo on the moon ?

ppk55
Then who took this photo of BOTH OF THEM?

Are you proposing that NASA never heard of a cable-release or a time-release for a camera on a tripod? Are you sure the rather severe curvature of the helmet faceplate wouldn't distort the image beyond your ability to make sense of the photo?

We landed on the moon. Get over it.

LifeIsPeculiar

ppk55
Then who took this photo of BOTH OF THEM?

Are you proposing that NASA never heard of a cable-release or a time-release for a camera on a tripod? Are you sure the rather severe curvature of the helmet faceplate wouldn't distort the image beyond your ability to make sense of the photo?

We landed on the moon. Get over it.

That's not really the answer here. As far as I know, there was no tripod or time release.

HOWEVER, the answer is more mundane than that. As you mentioned, it seems that the astronaut seen reflected in the visor (Gene Cernan) took that picture of the other astronaut (Harrison Schmidt) using the chest mounted camera that was standard issue for the astronauts.

The reason the reflection of Cernan seems to not be facing Schmidt is (1) the convex nature of the visor distorts the reflected image of Cernan, and (2) Cernan was aiming the camera at the rock anyway -- not directly at Schmidt.

Soylent Green Is People

LifeIsPeculiar

ppk55
Then who took this photo of BOTH OF THEM?

Are you proposing that NASA never heard of a cable-release or a time-release for a camera on a tripod? Are you sure the rather severe curvature of the helmet faceplate wouldn't distort the image beyond your ability to make sense of the photo?

We landed on the moon. Get over it.

That's not really the answer here. As far as I know, there was no tripod or time release.

HOWEVER, the answer is more mundane than that. As you mentioned, it seems that the astronaut seen reflected in the visor (Gene Cernan) took that picture of the other astronaut (Harrison Schmidt) using the chest mounted camera that was standard issue for the astronauts.

The reason the reflection of Cernan seems to not be facing Schmidt is (1) the convex nature of the visor distorts the reflected image of Cernan, and (2) Cernan was aiming the camera at the rock anyway -- not directly at Schmidt.

edit on 1/14/2014 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)

You guys are in a four year old thread everything has been explained just read it.

So long as we are indulging in completely irrelevant, nonsensical posts:

Irrelevant cuteneness.

dragonridr
You guys are in a four year old thread everything has been explained just read it.

Just because you say 'everything has been explained' doesn't make it the truth.
Who do you think you are?

ppk55

dragonridr
You guys are in a four year old thread everything has been explained just read it.

Just because you say 'everything has been explained' doesn't make it the truth.
Who do you think you are?

Just because you DON'T understand what's been explained doesn't mean it hasn't and iirc you have a job which has to do with imaging that's what is really sad.

HOWEVER, the answer is more mundane than that. As you mentioned, it seems that the astronaut seen reflected in the visor (Gene Cernan) took that picture of the other astronaut (Harrison Schmidt) using the chest mounted camera that was standard issue for the astronauts.

That is, of course, the correct answer.

I threw in the bit about the tripod just to stir the hornet's nest. They did use TV cameras mounted on remotely controlled pan and tilt mechanisms. That is how the video of the Lunar Ascent Module taking off was made. (Perhaps not on this mission.)

ppk55

dragonridr
You guys are in a four year old thread everything has been explained just read it.

Just because you say 'everything has been explained' doesn't make it the truth.
Who do you think you are?

The person who knows when something is explained arguing otherwise is stupid.

@dragonridr

Not if you don't happen to agree with the explanation it isn't.

Not that i disagree, but many do.

reply to post by LifeIsPeculiar

I threw in the bit about the tripod just to stir the hornet's nest.

What?

Deliberately posting information you knew to be false to antagonise a member or confuse the discussion...surely not.

ppk55

dragonridr
You guys are in a four year old thread everything has been explained just read it.

Just because you say 'everything has been explained' doesn't make it the truth.
Who do you think you are?

Who do you think you are? You started a thread years ago based upon your failure to comprehend visual information, it was explained to you within minutes, spiraled out of control for days as a paid Putin shill tried to use the thread for Anti-American propaganda, petered out and now, long after the issue has been settled to the satisfaction of anyone who has two brain cells to rub together, you have brought it back from the dead! WHY!?! What is your malfunction? Here's a clue for you: how many stars have your recent posts gotten? None. There is not a single person on ATS who thinks you have a valid point. Think about that. Not one.

MysterX
@dragonridr

Not if you don't happen to agree with the explanation it isn't.

Not that i disagree, but many do.

edit on 15-1-2014 by MysterX because: added info

As i said arguing something that was explained is irrational unless they just want to argue and then there is no need to even enter that discussion. In this case it was explained the person who posted it though a camera should be shown in the visor like the astronauts look through a viewfinder. Never occurred to him it could be mounted on the astronauts chest im not sure why he thought they had to look through a viewfinder or even how they could wearing helmets but hey to each his own.

This is why threads that hadn't had new replies for 2 years should be automatically (or manually) locked. Anyhow, although this is an old thread, I enjoyed analysing that photo and researching about it. Shame that people have to resort to name-calling and petty arguments that derail a thread.