RE: The Guardian Massif and Fires in Tasmania
The Apollo astronauts used high-resolution Hasselblad 500 EL cameras with Carl Zeiss optics and a 70 mm medium format film magazine. At a standard 4,000dpi scan you get 84 megapixels out of medium format film which is why a lot of landscape photographers still use it. The photos are in keeping with that especially considering there is no distortion from an atmosphere. Not all 40k pictures are sharp; there are lots of out of focus ones if you look at the archives. The don't release all the photos initially for the same reason I don't put blurry photos up on my website.
Shielded cameras are used on every space expedition in history it is simple technology. There is no atmosphere so you can shield from those temperatures with simple reflectors (even aluminum foil would work) . It is not like that heat would be on earth where you have convective heat from hot gases (ie air).
I have said enough related to moon conspiracies. The conspiracies have been around for decades and are thoroughly debunked by verifiable third party science. Both India and China now have now taken photos of the moon landing sites without any collaboration with the US. We will just have to disagree on this topic. Wikipedia (seeing as we cant trust anything not crowd sourced) has a good referenced summary of the conspiracies theories and why they don't hold https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon_landing_conspiracy_theories
The Hasselblad people are on video stating this is not possible. You can easily find it if you choose to look. There is no shielding or foil. The cameras are strapped to their chests. How would you frame a shot with no view finder? How would you change rolls of film with heavy gloves on? Where would you keep said rolls of film on your body to take 2000+ photos a day?
There is one guy who claims to be from Hasselblad on a private paid documentary with no references. I challenge you to find any written statement to that effect (even from that guy !). No one from Haddelblad themselves has ever issued a statement to that effect; rather the opposite they have statements verifying they modified the cameras. "Hasselblad modified and refined its cameras to make them even more suitable for space use. The cameras had reduced weight and were designed to work at over 120° C in the sun, and minus 65° C in the shade" (see statements here https://www.hasselblad.com/history/hasselblad-in-space/ )
NASA has there own statements on the modifications "The cameras, film magazines, and lenses used on Apollo 8 had black anodized surfaces to eliminate reflections. Modifications to the cameras included special large locks for the film magazines and levers on the f-stop and distance settings on the lenses. These modifications facilitated the camera's use by the crew operating with pressurized suits and gloves. Additionally, the cameras had no reflex mirror viewfinder and instead a simple sighting ring assisted the astronaut in pointing the camera"
https://www.history.nasa.gov/apollo_photo.html
These are all simple engineering challenges. It's not rocket science to change film with gloves. I changed films with mitts all the time when I used to shoot film. Anyway I won't be responding again as I have spent enough time already on this topic and there is enough written on the internet about it already.
Just let me see your shots from the camera strapped to your chest with the motorcycle helmet and gloves. Try to get to somewhere below zero at least and change film 20 or 30 times in a few hours. I'm sure the shots will be awesome. These guys were astro-nots with no photography training but as you know, anyone can take great pics as soon as they start shooting.
Over half of them are either blurry, overexposed, underexposed, or misaligned. If you take 30k shots you will get some good ones. Article here on this https://www.wired.com/2015/10/crappy-apollo-images-make-nasa-great/ and you can see 12K of the images here ; most of them are terrible and over or under exposed https://www.flickr.com/photos/projectapolloarchive/page140/
I regularly change batteries and memory cards in hostile conditions as I live in Northern Canada. I was out shooting Auroras last week in -45 C (-49F) wind chill and had to change batteries and memory cards with very large mitts so as not to get frostbite. Changing film (in a cartridge system where you don't have to spool it) would be the same level of difficulty. For the history of mountaineering alpine climbers have changed film even using spool systems all the time when climbing high mountains while wearing thick gloves without having modified cameras. Plus last I checked astronauts get a fair bit of training on the equipment they use and one of the key selection criteria to become an astronaut is manual dexterity.
If it all never happened how would you explain something like the Lunar Laser Ranging experiment (
There is a whole range of third party non US and non NASA evidence of the landing of which verification of the Lunar Laser Ranging experiment is just one of many. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-party_evidence_for_Apollo_Moon_landings . We now have China/Japan and India with photos of the landing sites from orbiters. People seem obsessed with the Hasselblad photos; but what about all the radio frequency evidence that they were up there and transmitting? The soviet union monitored and verified the radio traffic at the time as did other countries. And this was over multiple successful missions.
Anyway being dragged back into this debate again lol ; but as both a photographer and an engineer I see nothing inconstant with any of the multiple sources of verifiable data which allow you to cross check all the claims.
I'm not buying one bit of this. You can go to your friends at nasa and see the 1000's of photos and none are blurry.
Take a step back and think of what you are believing to be possible. Where did they even have room for all this film? Were they running back and forth the the art project dust filled lander? Or were they keeping the rolls on their bodies?
You do not mention the camera being strapped to their chest. No skills required for those shots, I guess.
Not to mention the movie cameras which is a whole other skill and even more storage.
Did you look at any of those 12k shots in the link I provided? There are lots of shots like this https://www.flickr.com/photos/projectapolloarchive/21650104195/
The astronauts received extensive training on their use and took the cameras home to practice ; so to say they are not trained photographers is simply not true. Anyone that has used a medium format film camera with a rangefinder would know they are very sharp for anything beyond the focal plane especially for the 70mm wide angle lenses they used (which is 36mm lens equivalent on 35mm terms). All you do is dial in the distance and exposure settings and aim the box. It's not rocket science; this is how a modern go pro works with a fixed focal point and no focusing and why you can get good pictures with one just strapping it to your helmet or chest. The framing of most of the photos is terrible as you can see in the gallery and they just crop them for presentation on official sites.
On the moon there is no atmosphere to suspend dust so dust is simply not a problem and they used contained cartridges for the film which they could simply put in the rover and then the lander. 30k shots were over all the missions and each film magazine had 360 photos (160 color and 200 black and white pictures ). So that is only ~80 magazines over 9 lunar missions so 8-10 magazines per mission. This is hardly a lot; the magazines look about 10cm by 10cm. http://www.ninfinger.org/karld/My%20Space%20Museum/apollocams.htm . They managed to bring a golf club; storing 8 cartridges of film is nothing.
Regardless film issues aside how one can throw away all the other evidence (radio frequency, photos from non US space agencies, Russian verification, laser ranging testing, moon rocks, etc) based on a belief that someone could not train an astronaut to shoot some photos with gloves on or store 8 film film cartridges.
The probability of the 400k people working on apollo keeping a conspiracy for 5 decades along with all the international agencies and universities from other countries cooperating to make up new data over the those decades to maintain the false sense of consistency in the data is mindbogglingly low. Anyway I really am done now ;-)
No I did not look at the photos. I am already convinced this is fake. I looked at it several years ago and have innumerable reasons you would then research to keep the con going in your mind.
399900 people worked in compartmentalized jobs and did not see the whole picture.
10 or so were evil and in on it.
90 were being blackmailed with sex tapes or whatever.
Just let me see your shots from the camera strapped to your chest with the motorcycle helmet and gloves. Try to get to somewhere below zero at least and change film 20 or 30 times in a few hours. When those come out good I will know you are right. Or maybe find a friend and train them for a few hours. Anyone can take a good photo.
With 360 photos in a magazine there was only 8-10 film magazines over a whole Apollo mission. Not 20-30 times an hour. You keep simply misquoting facts. There is ample evidence outside of information provided by NASA and the US. I have spent a good part of my life as a photographer (have been published by National Geographic) so I think I am aware of what it takes to take photos of the quality on the moon missions, which contrary to belief are are not particularly high quality from a framing/exposure/focus perspective.
If you wont even look at the evidence then there is no point taking the time to discuss.