The missing Apollo 14 magazine (w)

originally posted by: TheWhisper
a reply to: EartOccupant

Magazine 80 images identified, by comparing them with the LRO image of the crater Theophilus.
Credit to NASA for the images.

For some strange reason the image in the post is not working anymore. here is the images from another link.

a reply to: EartOccupant

Have a look at AS14-80-10620 the left images is the negative




credit to NASA for images.

originally posted by: UnderKingsPeak
Well goodness,
throw some popcorn together
because the replies on this thread just got interesting.

many times the simplest answer is the closest answer towards the truth. NASA has never uploaded the magazine 80 images online, well if you don't have them you just ignore them. If NASA does have the magazine 80 images then they can show that by uploading the images in High resolution to the internet. The source material we have scanned is one of the earliest releases of Apollo 14 images august 1971.

We can make much higher resolution scans but the hobby website would get to slow due to the size of the images. Also we give NASA the change to show they have the high resolution images of magazine 80. If they don't upload the magazine 80 images, it is likely that they don't have them.

The problem,
AwE130 thinks Apollo was a hoax and NASA and their historical archive will not contact us as they feel that they fuel the credibility of people that disagree with them. The fanatic attack on the credibility of the AwE130 website is also seen in this thread. When all arguments fail they attack the messenger, AwE130 has seen this over and over again.

Take the popcorn out as there is much more to this story, the whisper is getting louder. AwE130 did make some statements on other forums about our source but they asked AwE130 not to debate that or refer to it anymore. Anyone who is seriously interested, either side of the debate, is welcome to inspect the source material AwE130 has the scans of.

There is also the possibility that NASA has the high resolution scans, but they don't want to show them for some reason. This is due to what is seen in the high resolution images, something you not suppose to know. In that case it is possible that NASA will try to play the card that the source material we used is stolen. If this is done to an old woman you think they will be nice to us in the case they panic and play the stolen card?

www.youtube.com...

Obvious what we wrote is speculation and it can easy be resolved by NASA uploading the high resolution images of magazine 80. Until that day the options as mentioned above, as well as others, could be possible.

Just wonder how this image AS14-64-9059 is created.

the first image is the negative AwE130 has scanned from NASA documentation (August 1971). The second image is the positive we made of the negative. Under the positive is the version you can find on the Arizona State University website also from NASA documentation August 1971.

How did NASA produce the last image based on the documentation that was produced in 1971. Some Apollo propagandist will start to yell that the 1971 images are of a poor quality. If that is the case then NASA did a bad job in scanning the photos just months after the Apollo 14 moon landings. The August 1971 documentation shows the earliest version of Apollo 14 image we have found. Read the introduction page of the documentation in the link of the Arizona State University version. To us it is more likely that what you see in the 1971 documentation is how the images looked. If that is the case then the version we see today is heavily manipulated. Like always you are the judge in a journey towards the truth for all mankind.



links:
Arizona State University
apollo.sese.asu.edu...
Lunar and Planetary Institute
www.lpi.usra.edu...
AS14-64-9059
a.disquscdn.com...

credit images to NASA

a reply to: JimOberg

I've been told that a media office proof set of Scott Carpenter's on-board photographs was lost many years ago, so I'd need to FOIA it to even see it.

have you misspoken here Jim ?

are they lost or what ? does FOIA magically finds lost stuff ?

a reply to: onebigmonkey

What you think of the images of Magazine 80. Are you able to react?

originally posted by: MarioOnTheFly
a reply to: JimOberg

I've been told that a media office proof set of Scott Carpenter's on-board photographs was lost many years ago, so I'd need to FOIA it to even see it.

have you misspoken here Jim ?

are they lost or what ? does FOIA magically finds lost stuff ?

The rumors are getting louder that NASA lost Apollo 14 magazine 80, we invited Jim to inspect the source material we used. Well maybe NASA is still searching in old dusty corners of their archive, who knows. Jim may go for a FOIA request when they are lost. To AwE130 it would be more logical that NASA contacts us and we are able to show what we have. It would be very strange if NASA would now after 44 years tells, eureka we found magazine 80.

Apollo 14 magazine 80, NASA documentation tells, that magazine W (80) contains 207 frames of usable black and white photography. These are the images AwE130 has discovered and uploaded.
Link to NASA documentation Page 117:
www.hq.nasa.gov...

The Apollo Lunar Surface Journal (ALSJ) has also never seen these images. This is the link to magazine 80.
www.hq.nasa.gov...

When you click on the thumbnails Ed hengeveld made of magazine 80 you get directed to magazine 78???
www.hq.nasa.gov...

If they had ever seen magazine 80 they would had not made this mistake.

originally posted by: EartOccupant
Hi all,

I find this website wich claims they have new foto's from the Apollo 14 mission.
I don't know enough about it to know if they are new or not.
But maybe someone will enjoy them either way

THE MISSING APOLLO 14 MAGAZINE 80 (W)

What are the mystery moon swirls seen in the magazine 80 images? Dutch alternative media picks up on a very interesting story. When you use google translate or another tool you will be able to read the story, all the links in the article are to English sites.
urubin.com...

originally posted by: JimOberg
Kudos to the folks taking to time to detail their research results and interpretations for the rest of us to learn from.

I've also encountered NASA indexing problems in its image archives, most recently in seeking a Skylab EREP [earth surface] image, which failed to be accessible via on-line search but was located by NASA specialists. I've been told that a media office proof set of Scott Carpenter's on-board photographs was lost many years ago, so I'd need to FOIA it to even see it. These strike me as archival maintenance issues, not deliberate, but still they provide grist for the conspiracy mill and I think NASA officials are imprudent to continue to cut back on their archival maintenance staffing.

When you look at the introduction that accomplishes the photos you will see that the information was made available to individuals and organisations for researcher. If NASA tells today you need a FOIA request then AwE130 is questing that and it may be another indication that NASA lost magazine 80.

originally posted by: TheWhisper

originally posted by: EartOccupant
Hi all,

I find this website wich claims they have new foto's from the Apollo 14 mission.
I don't know enough about it to know if they are new or not.
But maybe someone will enjoy them either way

THE MISSING APOLLO 14 MAGAZINE 80 (W)

What are the mystery moon swirls seen in the magazine 80 images? Dutch alternative media picks up on a very interesting story. When you use google translate or another tool you will be able to read the story, all the links in the article are to English sites.
urubin.com...

You mean the swirls seen here?:
awe130.com...-179

To anybody who has scanned film or glossy prints it is quite obvious those are netwon rings, not an actual part of the image. You can see the effect in the third piece of film below:


This is why people pay top-dollar for anti-newton glass in scanners.

Now then, a few problems we have here:

Newton-rings only show up on scans, not on the actual medium. You claim to have scanned these, so should have seen the physical piece that contains the image. So then you should know those 'swirls' aren't part of the image, and only showed up after you scanned them.

But with "What are the mystery moon swirls seen in the magazine 80 images?" you are suggesting these are parts of the actual image, not a scanning artifact. Which is wrong, so why are you doing that?

Further on, in your website you claim you scanned the images from the Apollo 14 photo catalog. I am not sure if this book is glossy, but in the other scans I have seen it looks like normal book paper. Newton-rings should only appear on glossy/matte photographic/darkroom paper. Not book paper.

If you could provide some photos of your source (Not scans, but camera photos of the object you are scanning) this would clear a lot of questions up.

Regards,
Niels

originally posted by: TheWhisper
a reply to: onebigmonkey
-snip-
You asked us to show the source material to you that is not gone happen, but any investigating journalist or scientist is more then welcome to inspect the source material we used.

When they upload the high resolution image we will compare them with the higher resolution images we can produce.
-snip

Excellent! I got some 307 megapixel scans of several AS14-80 frames. I would like to compare your high-res scan to one of ours. Please provide the following image in your highest resolution: AS14-80-10453.

Here is a 1024x preview of our scan:


Great that you allow other people to investigate your source. I would love to scan your source with my Epson Perfection V750 pro. I can pay shipping and handling fee.

Kind regards,
Niels.

Forgot email and password I used to make that account. Will use this one instead!


Apollo 14 took high-resolution photos of the lunar surface from orbit with a modified Hycon KA-7A Aerial Reconnaissance Camera. The results produced from these military-grade optics and large-format film would be of incredible high resolutions.

And while other large-format photos of the lunar surface taken on Apollo 15, 16 and 17 are online in a mind-boggling 4.8 Gigapixels, high enough to discern Apollo equipment at the landing sites, high-resolution scans of the Apollo 14 KA-7A photos are missing.

The magazines used in the KA-7A camera were numbered AS14-79 and AS14-80.

First, below is a list of the previously online sources for these photos, albeit in low and moderate resolution. (To my knowledge)

1. Scans of Apollo 14 image catalog by Awe130
Notes: Awe130 has high-resolution scans of his catalog, but does not want to publish them. Perhaps someone from here can request access to the high-res scans?

2. Scans of Apollo 14 image catalog by NASA
Notes: As14-80 frames start at PDF file page 9.

3. Scans of Apollo 14 science report
Notes: page 282 til 288

4. Two AS14-80 frames scanned from (presumed) prints, see two links bottom page

5. Various images from his own, and other sources. Provided by Paul

6. The US National Archives has two frames:
6.1: catalog.archives.gov...
6.2: catalog.archives.gov...

So why am I making this reply?:
Because I have acquired ten 20"x24"inch prints of magazine AS14-80 and together with Paul, have scanned and processed them.

We will present an other source for the images, and in much greater resolution and fidelity than previously online. Most of our scans were previously only available as ultra-low resolution scans from the Apollo 14 photo catalog.

We will be providing the highest-resolution scans of these photos online to date.

I use my Epson Perfection V750 Pro to scan the gargantuan print in 6 sections, making sure there is ample overlap between the scans. Vuescan 9 outputs two files, a contrast/brightness enhanced scan, and the uncorrected RAW scan. Both files are saved as 16-bit grayscale uncompressed TIFFs. Sharp prints are scanned at 800 DPI, soft prints are scanned at 300 DPI.

Paul then uses photoshop to merge the 6 individual scans back into a single image. The combined scan is saved in two versions; the uncorrected RAW version, and a contrast enhanced, sharpened version to try and get the most detail out of the prints possible. Due to the nature of this process, there may be some visible stitching where two scans meet.

The resultant image resolution is 307 Megapixels.

A photo of one of the prints: AS14-80-10503


A Full-HD preview of AS14-80-10441


Scan of AS14-80-10441 compared to LRO


AS14-80-10441 is a high-magnification photo of the Theophilus crater, see here Note the website preview is only half the resolution of a raw scan tile.

The Apollo 16 ITEK Panoramic Mapping Camera compared to the Hycon KA-7A (Keep in mind AS16 is a NASA scan from the original film, and ours is only a scan of a print.)



Another comparison by Paul.

This print was not sharp, so I only scanned at 300DPI. The resolution is still good:





After several months of hard work, this project comes to a close. I'd like to thank everybody for their help and insight.

All of the 10 prints have been scanned and can be found on this archival website.

AS14-80 prints:
Subject: 20x24" b/w darkroom prints
Medium: 20x24" darkroom paper
Scanner: Epson Perfection V750 Pro
Scan software: Vuescan 9
OS: Windows 10
Scan Resolution: Between 300 and 800 DPI, depends on print sharpness.
File extension: Tiff

Notes:
!LARGE FILE SIZES!
File size of individual frames varies from 17 to 125MB.
File size of merges varies from 124mb to 600mb.

Each print is scanned in 6 sections, making sure there is ample overlap between the scans.
Vuescan 9 outputs two files, a contrast/brightness enhanced scan, and the
uncorrected RAW scan. Both files are saved as 16-bit grayscale
uncompressed TIFFs. Sharp prints are scanned at 800 DPI, soft prints are
scanned at 300 DPI.

Paul/OneBigMonkey then uses photoshop to merge the 6
individual scans back into a single image. The combined scan is saved in
two versions; the uncorrected RAW version, and a contrast enhanced,
sharpened version to try and get the most detail out of the prints
possible. Due to the nature of this process, there may be some visible
stitching where scans meet.

Individual scans provided as AS14-80-10###-C#-I#-F#, merged files uploaded with 'merge-C#-I#' suffix.

C1I1= Colour fade/cast correction enabled. ICE Infrared Spot/dust removal enabled set to light. I2 = set to medium. Highlight / dark values enhancement for greater contrast, usually very conservative to not blow highlights/dark values.

C0I0 / RAW = Colour fade/cast correction disabled. ICE Infrared Spot/dust removal disabled. Unprocessed scan.

F## = frame number of set or single image scanned in multiple sections.


Below is a list of full-res merged files as JPGs (Between 8 and 75 MB each)
AS14-80-10412
AS14-80-10441
AS14-80-10444
AS14-80-10453
AS14-80-10455
AS14-80-10459
AS14-80-10466
AS14-80-10503
AS14-80-10518
AS14-80-10535

Paul will continue to look at the files in closer detail and compare them to other space missions to the moon.

Regards,
Niels

Disclaimer: I and Paul are not from NASA or endorsed by them. We are doing this in our own free time.

This archive contains 251 photos taken on Apollo 14 by a modified Hycon KA-7A camera. These magazines were designated as AS14-79 and AS14-80.

I would like to thank the NSSDCA for scanning and providing magazine AS14-79 and AS14-80.

I would like to thank Paul for processing the NSSDCA .TIFF files.

These photos were acquired by requesting NSSDCA dataset PSPG-00256. A film or digital copy of AS14-79 and AS14-80 was requested. The NSSDCA scanned a film for this request and several months later the resultant digital dataset was provided.

Each file is 23 MB and has a resolution of 6016*4016 pixels.

The NSSDCA provided TIFF files appear to be NIKON D750 raw files, which can only be correctly opened with special software. Paul was kind enough to batch-process all raw files. Each file was put through a DNG converted, Photoshop will then allow it to be imported normally. This caused the images to turn brown, which was corrected by turning them grayscale.

Good night.

Paul and I did not sit still, here a taste of the research done on the photos. Paul has been able to find the location for every AS14-80 and AS14-79 photo.

Location of the AS14-80 photos from NASA:



Location of AS14-80 photos scanned by me:



Let's compare AS14-80-10441 with the other sources over the years.





It can be seen that the large-scale photography of the Apollo missions is very competitive against modern probes, even against the LRO.

And what about the AS14-79 photos? Although the magazine did not work well, Rosa tried to photograph the Apollo 14 landing site during the landing. Did he succeed?




Hell yes! Cone Crater can be seen on a number of photographs. Let's zoom in:



The red arrow points to Cone Crater, the largest crater at the landing site. If the magazine had worked properly, Rosa might have photographed the LM shortly after landing, or perhaps even during the landing. Whether AS14-79 had enough resolution for that, I'm not sure. The photos were taken in a higher orbit than AS14-80.

The website with all the research will be done soon!