Remastered and stabilised film of Apollo 16 Lunar Rover.

Awesome footage! Youtube does decent stabilising when you upload a shaky video too:
www.youtube.com...

DeepVisions
I would like to see a moon rover with a hd camera and constant streaming to get a real feel of what the moon is like.

It would look like a still picture, unless there's some rovers or astronauts moving around. I'll settle for hi-res colour photos, and videos of the aforementioned rovers and astronauts.

JokerThe1st
reply to post by smurfy

 

I do have a quick question, being no space expert or lighting expert, can anyone tell me what the sudden light source is or where it comes from at 1 min 20 seconds into the video.
the way it enters and exits the video quickly seems a little odd from a no knowledge point of view.

thankyou

Looks like a lens flare from the Sun reflecting off some part of the buggy, or even from the Sun itself.

DiscordianJism
reply to post by smurfy

 

More evidence that it never took place. If you play the video slightly faster, it just looks like a 4 wheeler driving around in the desert. The gravity is identical as Earth's, the motion is just slowed down slightly. I call BS.

But dust on Earth billows and lingers in the air, because we have air. In vacuum, dust falls straight to the ground, which is what we see in the video. The "speeding up" tactic doesn't work for other Apollo videos, because it makes the astronauts move unnaturally fast and jerky.

reply to post by geobro

Lunar dust is shallow in places, and the buggy left almost no tracks there. I looked at the hi-res LRO images where you can see the Apollo landing sites, and the buggy track can be seen where the regolith is deeper, fading gradually where it gets shallower or harder.

reply to post by smurfy



The video shown was the rehearsal.

Here is the actual footage:-

What are those 4 bright dots at the horizon at 1:17?


In the footage there is a clear "cut" right when the Rover approach to....

And this at 1:20?

reply to post by Arken


Rocks on the hill line!

reply to post by wmd_2008


And from when, exactly, the rocks hovering?

geobro

reply to post by smurfy

 

like the see through neil

I don't see your point, do you mean the capsule is real, but the astronaut isn't, or vice versa? If you are going to fake something, it would be a good idea to have all the relevant components in one place. kinda silly otherwise. Or it could just be that the picture is secondhand, taken by a camera viewing a monitor, hence the ghosting and various double image effects.
It's also funny how you can joke about a transluscent Neil Armstrong, he should have been dead at least twice testing stuff on Earth and in LEO some time before the Moonshot, I suppose then, that was all rigged too, a real Machiavellian plot then?

reply to post by Arken


You do realize that there's no atmosphere on the moon? The reason why it appears to be "hovering" is because when the sun light doesn't hit an area it will be pitch black unlike on earth?

DeepVisions
I feel like the dust should stay in the air a little longer with the reduced gravity. It does seem kind of fake now that it's stabilized. Is this video playing at normal speed or is it sped up?

There is no air on the moon.

Thanks for sharing that video here, smurfy! It amazes me how crisp and clear the footage of those later missions were compared to the first. It was almost like I was standing out on the surface with Young and Duke.

And I know the hoaxers are soon going to be derailing this topic in force, but to me just the flawless lighting across the entire landscape with no falloff tells me this was the real deal.

reply to post by smurfy


The more I look at it the more it is evident that it is fake.

It looks like a large studio rather than the Moon.

The way everything looks and moves is just awkward.

Actually, it is more than awkward. It is plain wrong.

Good actors. I'd hire them.

Well thanks to all who replied. What struck me the most was the total desolation that the astronauts were experiencing as they stood there, or on the rover. Not a sound would be heard, not a funeral note. No V8 burbles, or wind, nothing. Perhaps feeling vibration, but nothing else.

I dare say, the focus is now on the Chinese effort in space, who now have all the time in the 'world' to explore the Moon, but there is nothing to surpass what the Apollo crews, and those before them from any part of the world did in their time frames.

Moon landing hoax believers seem to be covering up a self perceived lack by negating the accomplishments of others.

Just because someone doesn't understand something, doesn't mean the thing that is not understood doesn't exist.

As for the comment that the (very very cool btw) film seems "wrong," well, it seems "off" because it was taken in 1/6 gravity and in a near vacuum. That makes it "off" compared to film, or video, taken on Earth. See?

I was about three when those guys first got there. I was awakened by my dad and placed in front of the old RCA color TV console and told to "remember this... this is history happening. We made it to the moon!"

And I still do remember it... thanks dad. Pretty damned cool.

Cybernet
reply to post by smurfy

 

The more I look at it the more it is evident that it is fake.

It looks like a large studio rather than the Moon.

The way everything looks and moves is just awkward.

Actually, it is more than awkward. It is plain wrong.

Good actors. I'd hire them.

I was going to sign off since my connection is giving me serious grief tonight.
Okay, going with your flow it is not a large studio, it would be huge, and lit to perfection for say four miles. and this on a mission that had already been quite severely curtailed by congress at the time, (the rovers were originally meant to be waiting on the Moon) and heavily revised to be able to go with the astronauts. I have no opinion of the other stuff you mention, because there is nothing to have an opinion on.

geobro

same again you will get jokers on this site tell you they carried the rover about wtf ??

Looks like someone has no idea about RESOLUTION of images

Apollo 17 Sample 76015, 143

Close-up of the outer surface as the astronauts saw it on the Moon. The large depressions are vesicles: the imprints of gas bubbles trapped in the rock in its molten state following a massive impact. The light-colored areas are are centered on "zap pits": small craters blasted into the rock surface by small impactors as it sat on the lunar surface. The light colored regions represents rock shattered in the immediate vicinity of each of the tiny impacts. In some cases, small amounts of melt was produced and was ejected onto the surrounding surface. The display portion shown here - 76015, 143 - weighs 333-gram. Photographed by Ulli Lotzmann in December 2006 at Deutsches Technikmuseum Berlin.

There is no way that a sample of moon rock on earth could ever have these characteristics. This sample could only have been transported to the Earth, by a vehicle that retrieved it,and brought it back.

It is the undeniable evidence that makes all other conjecture a series of moot points and irrelevant in any discussion about the reality of the U.S. Apollo space program.

reply to post by charlyv


The world thinks twice about their greatest achievement, these moon rocks could very well be, just rocks considering.

reply to post by JadeStar


I meant the space above the surface. Thank you sooo much for the correction as i'm sure nobody knew what i was talking about


reply to post by Baddogma

I don't believe it's people negating the accomplishments of others.
I think people are reluctant to admit there is nothing on the moon, therefore it feels better to say we haven't been there yet or there is a cover up.

reply to post by smurfy


That is great!! we are used to nice HD still images but it's a treat to see a film I have watched dozens of times in HD!
I hope whoever did this releases all the movies from the Apollo missions!
S&F for ya!

JokerThe1st
reply to post by smurfy

 

I do have a quick question, being no space expert or lighting expert, can anyone tell me what the sudden light source is or where it comes from at 1 min 20 seconds into the video.
the way it enters and exits the video quickly seems a little odd from a no knowledge point of view.

thankyou

I can answer that and it was explained to me when I watched with wide eyes when it was live!
There are small moon dust particles that stick to the lens and if they move the camera too near the direction of the sun it will do exactly that, if they had moved it a little higher (which happened on one flight) the Vidicon tube (they didn't have the forgiving CCD cameras then) would instantly burn out!
You will see that in one of the walks as it gets too near the sun and Houston tells the astronaut to be careful and also asked him to make sure his helmet shield is pulled down (I believe it was Shepard) said "the static electricity has dust on my shield and I used my glove and scratched the shield!" so Houston told him to make sure he didn't look into the sun with his clear shield!

Does anyone have the ability to take this film and speed up 6 times. I would expect at 6 times speed it will look like a buggy travelling over a desert surface. Doesn't prove anything however.