It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by jaden_x
if the sun is the only bright source of light in space, then why are their shadows all over the place going in different directions?
Originally posted by jaden_x
if the sun is the only bright source of light in space, then why are their shadows all over the place going in different directions?
It's a panoramic composite.
Originally posted by jaden_x
but the color issue is still up for grabs i suppose.
To me it looks colorized just to add to the presence and was probably originally black and white or taken to black and white at some point.
Originally posted by Aggamemnon
so nasa added false color? what does this prove? only that they added false color. and that's nothing new they have been doing it forever. all those Fancy Hubble photos you see, all false color images because well frankly its rather boring otherwise.
Some are false color because they aren't taken in RGB ...
Originally posted by weedwhacker
Please note, again. This was 1972 (in the case of Apollo 17).
They did NOT take digital still cameras with them. The Hasselblads used actual film. Kodak film, I believe. Specially designed and made for NASA.
Originally posted by IX-777
The most obvious object is the "bag" located at bottom of the photo to the right of the astronaut with the moon vehicle - it is close to the camera / bottom of the image. This is clearly in black and white.
The same goes for several other objects in the photo - just below the wheel to the left of the astronaut is another instrument, some sort of rod sticking up from the ground, again in black and white.
Secondly: Lights - Go to the right of the vehicle and you will see a red cable across the ground coming from the bottom of the image, here you can see light reflections in the lense causing flares and beams to show. Notice that there is no light source above, and the flares and light beams stops exactly where the mountains in the background ends and the black horizon comes in - obviously this should not be the case, the light beams and flares should be consistent out into the black area as well as these are lens artifacts and have nothing to do with the background. In other words, it seems to indicate strongly that the background has simply been cut out following the edges of the mountains.
Thirdly: Background repetition - the background is the EXACT same as the background of the following photo:
www.lpi.usra.edu...
These photos are supposed to be taken at different sites, yet the background is identical.
Also notice that there is no visible light source on the first image yet it is strongly visible in the second image...
Originally posted by IX-777
Kind of funny that JRA who claimed the bag is black and white also posted the photos that disproves his own statement
Originally posted by IX-777
And yes I come from Norway so I have lived in the mountains all my life, I am pretty familiar with how distant mountains look in relation to closer objects. Personally I think the LM in the photo where it is in distance seem to be much further away than only 150 metres, and much closer to the mountains in the back than the other image. Personally I do not feel the issues raised here have been debunked at all so far.