Apollo 15 panorama - matching the rocks to the hi-res LRO image

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
Please Notice that in the Constantine version he has made the artistic choice to photoshopagraphically remove out the lens flairs, he has re-shaped the mountains, he also left in some has duplicate rocks.

Removing the lens flares makes sense. Since it will change from photo to photo, it would likely confuse the stitching software if you left it in. As for duplicate rocks, its already been mentioned that this is typical of any panoramic image. Especially if one is using a wide angle lens (creates more optical distortion), and if you don't have enough overlap from photo to photo.

Any serious Apollo researcher would have to look at these 3 panaromas objectively and say "that's nice artwork, but the panorama does not prove that Jim Irwin was on the moon."

Nor does is disprove that he was on the Moon. Any serious Apollo researcher is going to look at the original, individual photos. Any serious Apollo researcher is going to understand the limits of photo stitching software. Any serious Apollo researcher is going to look at the mountains of evidence that there is for the Apollo missions and not just some panorama's with stitching artifacts.

Here are a bunch of QTVR panoramas from the Apollo missions:

Moonpans.com

Originally posted by wildespace
reply to post by impaired

 

That's a great-looking panorama, thanks! Could you please make a panorama from these frames (EVA1 at the LM)
www.hq.nasa.gov...
frames 22493 to 22520

I'm asking because the panorama they have is a bit crap:
www.hq.nasa.gov...

Sure! I'll get on that right now.

^^^ This one is really tricky. That lens flare is really messing me up.

I may have to eat my words on this one, but I will try another two or three times. After that I will have to give up. But let's see.

reply to post by jra


Lol. I noticed that you were using DJW's favorite debate technique : the mirror. You take what I wrote and and mirror it back to me to get your point across. Well done. Point taken. Let's just get on with discussing the Dune Crater Phenomenon.

It's been 3 pages already and nobody here has mentioned the fact that Jim Irwin's camera was jammed up when he was at Dune Crater on August 1, 1971.

It's been 3 pages already and nobody here has mentioned the fact that there were two official NASA panoramas of Dune Crater from 1972. They even had catalogue numbers were S-71-47077 and S-71-47080. See pages 19 and 20 of the pdf.

apollo.sese.asu.edu...


Why don't you use those panoramas instead to prove that Apollo 15 visited Dune Crater?

Here is a 1971 Apollo 15 image of the landing area.
www.hq.nasa.gov...

Zoom in closely to Dune Crater.

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
It's been 3 pages already and nobody here has mentioned the fact that Jim Irwin's camera was jammed up when he was at Dune Crater on August 1, 1971.

It's been 3 pages already and nobody here has mentioned the fact that there were two official NASA panoramas of Dune Crater from 1972. They even had catalogue numbers were S-71-47077 and S-71-47080. See pages 19 and 20 of the pdf.

apollo.sese.asu.edu...


Why don't you use those panoramas instead to prove that Apollo 15 visited Dune Crater?

One of the links in my original post mentions that Jim's camera jammed part way through the panorama:
www.hq.nasa.gov...
It's also mentioned on the page with individual frames, which is easily accessible from the first link:
www.hq.nasa.gov...

My original post also links to one of the officially-assembled panoramas:
www.hq.nasa.gov...

I already explained why I used the panorama from Google Earth. Regardless of what excuses you come up with to discredit Apollo landings, all of the panoramas were assembled from the original frames from Apollo cameras. If you want to pick a fault, do so with those individual frames.

However, I'm prepared to make a step forward. Give me a panorama of your choice, and I will try to find matching features on LRO imagery.

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
Here is a 1971 Apollo 15 image of the landing area.
www.hq.nasa.gov...

Zoom in closely to Dune Crater.

Zooming in closely to a jpg image will give you compression artifacts. I don't see any symbols there, but I do see vague outlines of small craters, which match the ones on LRO image:
www.flickr.com...

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
It's been 3 pages already and nobody here has mentioned the fact that Jim Irwin's camera was jammed up when he was at Dune Crater on August 1, 1971.

And why is that significant when it comes to the Apollo hoax? Had Apollo been a hoax, why would they have camera malfunction in there "script"?

Here's the relevent portion from the Apollo Lunar Surface Journal, along with commentary, for anyone interested.

146:32:34 Irwin: Camera's stopped working.

146:32:36 Scott: It has? Maybe you're out of film.

146:32:41 Irwin: I just put this on! (Pause)

[Frame AS15-84- 11248, the last one in Jim's partial pan, is only the 70th frame on this magazine. The following is taken from the Apollo 15 Mission Report.]

["Near the end of the second EVA, the (LMP's) 70-mm camera ceased to advance film. The crew reported that the camera was again operational after return to the lunar module. The camera was again used on the third EVA; however, after a short series of exposures had been made, the failure recurred. The camera was used for additional photography during the TransEarth phase without recurrence of the problem. Post flight analysis of the hardware included operational testing, disassembly and inspection, and measurement of battery charge. Operational testing with film loads indicated proper film advancement until approximately 200 cycles had been accumulated, at which time the failure mode was duplicated several times in succession. The film did not advance, although the motor was running. Disassembly and examination of the drive mechanism showed that the two set screws in the drive pinion were slipping on the motor shaft."]

["After the last use of the camera during the mission, the crew had difficulty removing the magazine. This was caused by a rivet which had become detached from the camera magazine latch mechanism."]

["Corrective action is as follows: flats will be ground on the motor shaft. A locking compound will be applied to the set screws when they are properly torqued against the flats. Also, epoxy will be applied to the tops of the screws to prevent them from backing off."]

[In a 1996 letter, Dave suggested that an additional factor in the failure may have been the fact that "the cameras had probably never been this hot for this long. They were a real heat sink."]

[Excessive heating could have contributed to slippage of the set screws but, no matter what the details were, the fixes were successful and no camera problems of this type occurred on either Apollo 16 or 17.]

Also, weren't you going on about how they left all the camera's on the Moon? It sounds like they brought this one back for study and examination.

Why don't you use those panoramas instead to prove that Apollo 15 visited Dune Crater?

I would never use a photo to try to prove anything. But as one of many pieces of evidence, sure.

As for your zoom in on Dune crater. It looks like .jpg compression. I see it in many places all over that image.

Originally posted by jra
Had Apollo been a hoax, why would they have camera malfunction in there "script"?

Also, and this is my favourite, why did they fake the failed Apollo 13 mission? So that we could have another Tom Hanks movie?

Speaking of Apollo 13, I'd like to share a couple of photos I found in the Apollo 13 archive at www.hq.nasa.gov...

View of Earth:
www.hq.nasa.gov...
This looks 100% genuine to me, and I don't think they had any satellite that high in orbit and able to take such good pictures.This is clearly a colour-film image from a high-quality camera.

Far side of the Moon:
www.hq.nasa.gov...
The two major craters in this photograph are Chaplygin (just left of centre), and Schliemann (below centre).
You can compare all the minute craters and surface details with this LRO image:
www.flickr.com...

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter



No just a lack of understanding of jpeg artifacts by the poster (you).

Originally posted by wildespace

However, I'm prepared to make a step forward. Give me a panorama of your choice, and I will try to find matching features on LRO imagery.

Try using the panoramas that NASA produced from 1971. Either S-71-47077 and S-71-47080.

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter

Originally posted by wildespace

However, I'm prepared to make a step forward. Give me a panorama of your choice, and I will try to find matching features on LRO imagery.

Try using the panoramas that NASA produced from 1971. Either S-71-47077 and S-71-47080.

Where can I find these panoramas?

Originally posted by wildespace
Where can I find these panoramas?

That's a very good question wildespace. I'm so very surprised that none of the regular pro-Apollo crowd have stepped forward yet so far with any information about the Dune Crater panoramas that were produced in 1971 by NASA's own admission. These panoramas were assigned unique catalogue numbers S-71-47077 and S-71-47080. See pages 19 and 20 of the pdf for the proof.

apollo.sese.asu.edu...

I will go out on a limb here and make this claim : NASA's S-71-47077 and S-71-47080 are a fraud. They never existed.
And I will wait patiently for someone reading this thread to prove me wrong.

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter

Originally posted by wildespace
Where can I find these panoramas?

That's a very good question wildespace. I'm so very surprised that none of the regular pro-Apollo crowd have stepped forward yet so far with any information about the Dune Crater panoramas that were produced in 1971 by NASA's own admission. These panoramas were assigned unique catalogue numbers S-71-47077 and S-71-47080. See pages 19 and 20 of the pdf for the proof.

apollo.sese.asu.edu...

I will go out on a limb here and make this claim : NASA's S-71-47077 and S-71-47080 are a fraud. They never existed.
And I will wait patiently for someone reading this thread to prove me wrong.

First: No. It's up to YOU to prove something is a fraud. Just calling it is not enough.

Now, what is it you are trying to say? That the photographs of these mosaics are fraudulent?

You can put them together yourself. S-71-47077 was made from 6 frames (as per your PDF file). Those would be:

AS15-90-12240
AS15-90-12241
AS15-90-12242
AS15-90-12243
AS15-90-12244
AS15-90-12245

And S-71-47080 was made up of 9 frames (again, from your PDF), and those would be:

AS15-89-11472
AS15-89-11473
AS15-89-11474
AS15-89-11475
AS15-89-11476
AS15-89-11477
AS15-89-11478
AS15-89-11479
AS15-89-11480

Apollo Image Atlas

reply to post by eriktheawful


Post the panoramas, S-71-47077 and S-71-47080.

Post them as proof that they existed.

Can't do that? Then I'm sorry. Those panoramas are a fraud and they don't exist.

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter


If those panoramas never existed, why did you ask me to use them with LRO images? The impression I got from your previous posts is that you find the existing panoramas unreliable (due to editing done on them) and that those 2 old panoramas would be more reliable. But then you turned your argument around in some strange new direction.

In any case, here's what I think. Those old panoramas were stitched from photographic prints (or grainy low-res scans) and looked a bit messy, like this one: www.hq.nasa.gov...
Since the advent of digital age, they made hi-res scans and assembled panoramas that were much better, like this part of the above panorama: www.hq.nasa.gov...
And when it came to chosing which panoramas to upload to Internet, they saw no reason to upload those early ones.

The point still stands: we have access to the individual frames. If there was anything fishy with the Apollo photography, it should be evident from them, not from the numerous panoramas that were assembled out of them by different people at different times, with different levels of editing.

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
reply to post by eriktheawful

 

Post the panoramas, S-71-47077 and S-71-47080.

Post them as proof that they existed.

Can't do that? Then I'm sorry. Those panoramas are a fraud and they don't exist.

You have to be one of the most hilarious Moon Hoaxers that I've ever met!

Your Logic: If it's not on the internet, then it's a fraud, and didn't exist or happen.

So, according to you, a vacation that I took several years ago to Ruby Falls never happened because you can't download or find pictures of that vacation on the internet!

Sorry, but not every single image from the Apollo Program is available on the internet at this time. They are working on it though:

To allow full access to the original flight films for both researchers and the general public, Johnson Space Center and Arizona State University's Space Exploration Resources are scanning and creating an online digital archive of all the original Apollo flight films. Through this online interface, users may browse through the archive and download any of the images. This web site also provides a suite of resources regarding the images and the cameras that were used during the Apollo program.

Arizona State University Apollo Image Archive

They are not the only ones, if you Google it, you'll find many places doing just this: getting these pictures on to the internet. The amount of pictures shot DURING the missions is enormous, and then later, mosaics like the ones you are questioning were done AFTER the mission and are many in number too.

Much harder to scan a mosaic than the individual frames, each were over 4 inches wide, so a mosaic of 6 of them would be a 2 foot wide picture.

But it's been pointed out to you a few times now: the original frames for those mosaics ARE available, from several places. And if someone was SERIOUS (unlike you) about examining moon landing photos to find something wrong, they would not use a mosaic stitched together by NASA, but would want the original frames.

Which are there.

You can even make your own mosaic, make your own S71-47077 or S71-47080 if you want by downloading the photos and stitching them with your favorite photoshop program, or you can upload them and use Gigapan, like they did here for some Apollo 15 shots:

Apollo 15 Gigapan of Dune Crater

Wow. Still can't get over this: "Because it's not on the internet, it's a fraud."..........freaking hilarious!

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
reply to post by eriktheawful

 

Post the panoramas, S-71-47077 and S-71-47080.

Post them as proof that they existed.

Can't do that? Then I'm sorry. Those panoramas are a fraud and they don't exist.

If they haven't been uploaded to the internet, they must be fake/nonexistent?

Sayonara logic...