Apollo Moon "Hoax" - Photographic "Evidence" Questions

[danalec99]

[ame]http://youtube.com/watch?v=mQKxAqpjroo[/ame]

 

[THORHAMMER]

most ridiculous thing ive ever heard.

If it were fake shots of the studio/setup would have surfaced by now, heck we cant even keep a presidents sex scandals secret for more then a few months.

Also, there is no motivation for us to lie. We had / have the technology
to do it. weve risked lives for less, and the pilots wanted to go.. motivation, and money point that we went.

also there was tons of facts from einsteinien theories that were proven
by going, you cant adjust history like that with nobody knowing or talking

everyone that has a video or speech about it being fake is selling something, follow the money, follow the motivation, if your a sucker buy their dvd for 29.99 suckers... hahahaha

 

[ksmattfish]

It would have been very easy to take photographs of the most magnificent sight human beings had ever seen by pointing a correctly set up camera at the sky away from the sun...

The lunar surface is lit by the sun, making the correct exposure for lunar landscape photos f/16 @ 1/400 sec using ISO 400 film, or EV 16. Stars, other than the sun, are about EV -4, making the correct exposure for a starfield approximately f/2.8 @ 1 min using ISO 400 film (not taking into account reciprocity failure). There is a 19 stop difference between the brightness of the lunar surface in the sun, and the stars (other than the sun). That means the difference in brightness is 2 to the 19th power, which if I did my math correctly means the lunar surface is 524,288 times brighter than the star field.

Do a little research into the dynamic range abilities of film, or any photographic process ever invented, and the human eye, and it becomes readily apparent why you can't see or take photos of the stars from the lunar surface.

I haven't done much research on the supposed moon landing hoax, but I have seen a few documentaries, and I have to say that I felt that all of the photographic "evidence" presented in the shows could be easily explained by anyone with slightly more than a passing interest in photography. None of it perplexed me.

 

[DSG]

Can YOU see the starts when the sun's out? ).

Of course not because the Earth has an Atmosphere and when one looks at the sky, rather than seeing the black of space, one sees light from Rayleigh scattering off the air, but the moon does'nt have an Atmosphere so no Rayleigh scattering can take place and therefore there is nothing to obscure the light from the stars.
Something Tiberius could never have known two thousand years ago!!!
Rayleigh scattering is proportional to the inverse fourth power of wavelength, which means that the shorter wavelength of blue light will scatter more than the longer wavelengths of green and red light. This gives the sky a blue appearance. Conversely, when one looks towards the sun at sunset, one sees the colors that were not scattered away...the longer wavelength, red light.

 

[Alex_B]

It is all a big hoax ... MAN HAS NEVER WALKED ON MARS!!!

 

[Alex_B]

oopps, sorry guys, wrong thread ...

 

[Don Simon]

I walked on Mars. It took ages to get the chocolate out the carpet.

 

[Alex_B]

I walked on Mars. It took ages to get the chocolate out the carpet.

:lmao:

 

[highwoodhiker]

Jack White makes a lot of claims and accusations. The problem is, the man just flat doesn't know what he's talking about. His claptrap has been authoritatively rebuked time and time again.

His math is poor also. His claim of one photo every 50 seconds would be accurate for 1 astronaut but there was 12 in total which equals 1 photo every 10 minutes per astronaut which is highly conceivable. 6 photos per hour means an astronaut could take 12 picutes in a few minutes at a certain location and not take a photo for another 2 hours and still average 6 photos per hour.
Not that I am trying to prove or disprove any evidence of manned flight to the moon. It's like discussions of politics or religion where people have chosen a side, usually based on what their parents told them they should believe, and will use all manner of logical fallacies and even attack the character of others just to try to prove they are correct. Watching from the sidelines is interesting. But I have little interest in the actual subject matter or who is right. My opinion of many things is that I don't need to have an opinion.
So no comment on the validity of the evidence of lunar landings. Just pointing out the math error. That's the nice thing about math. The answer is either right or wrong and you can't just make things up to make it appear otherwise.