|
|
Post by lionking on Nov 26, 2006 16:47:30 GMT -4
|
|
|
|
Post by grashtel on Nov 26, 2006 17:07:49 GMT -4
Its lens flare not a halo a big clue is the fact that it is visible in front of objects unlike a halo. |
|
|
|
Post by lionking on Nov 27, 2006 5:58:07 GMT -4
|
|
|
|
Post by gwiz on Nov 27, 2006 6:26:08 GMT -4
Looks like it's in front of the LM to me, you can follow the change in brightness as it goes across the edge of the LM. The actual bright spot itself appears to be a reflection off the MESA equipment tray which folds out from that side of the LM. |
|
|
|
Post by nomuse on Nov 27, 2006 6:36:38 GMT -4
You may not understand what a "lens flare" properly is. Basically, it is an image produced by light that has gotten inside the optics. Depending on where inside the lens assembly light has gotten, and the nature of those lens elements, the flare may be circular, octagonal, and include multiple elements (as the light reflects off one element to illuminate another in a "hall of mirrors" effect, with both shoving light towards the film.
On the other hand, an atmospheric halo is the result of reflection on suspended water droplets. Generally you will only see one at a distance, or when close up, associated with live water; a waterfall, a garden sprinkler, etc. Halos do not as a rule develop in dry air within the distance between, say, the LM and the photographer in your second example photograph. Nor do they look anything at all like what is in either of those pictures of yours.....they show as a thin ring or section thereof (the familiar rainbow).
|
|
|
|
Post by Jason Thompson on Nov 27, 2006 6:56:17 GMT -4
Oh dear. That first link is to a picture that is a composite. It's made up of several images combined to make a nice protrait shot. It is not a single picture taken during the EVA, as the site claims, and the image identification number shows that. Note that all official Apollo images are identified by a tag that goes: ASxx-xx-xxxx, where the first two numbers are the mission number (so AS11 is from Apollo 11), the next two the magazine number and the last four the shot number. AS11-40-5863-69 does not fit the standard pattern, and indicates that it is made from the shots from AS11-40-5863 to AS11-40-5869.
Image analysis claiming evidence of faking is therefore suspect, precisely because that image is a fake, at least in terms of not being a single image taken by one push of the camera trigger.
See how the negatives show the halo ofthe star behind the objects.
Firstly, as I said, this is a composite image, so such analysis is dubious. Secondly, I can still see the inner circle over the top of the LM, and since everything on the LM is significantly brighter, why would you not expect it to drown out most of the dim lens flare?
tell me now that this is a lens flare.
OK, it's a lens flare. Seriously, that's what it is.
|
|
|
|
Post by Count Zero on Nov 27, 2006 7:37:34 GMT -4
The person who made this page went to a lot of trouble over nothing. It took me less than 15 seconds to find this image at the Project Apollo Archive, where it is clearly labeled as a composite by Ed Hengeveld. DUHHHH!  No conspiracy here, just a nice piece of artwork. Note that this composite is readily identifiable as such. Take that lesson to heart. |
|
|
|
Post by lionking on Nov 27, 2006 7:39:39 GMT -4
|
|
|
|
Post by Jason Thompson on Nov 27, 2006 7:55:17 GMT -4
No, lionking, you missed the point entirely. AS11-40-5863-69 is a composite, wherever it comes from! It is made up from elements of the various pictures on the film roll from exposure number AS11-40-5863 to exposure number AS11-40-5869. Why did I bother explaining the Apollo image numbering system if you are going to ignore it?
|
|
|
|
Post by gwiz on Nov 27, 2006 7:58:22 GMT -4
the halo is there. Moreover, it is colorful, indicating serious presence of atmosphere, as one of the definitions say that halo is colored light broken by atmosphere. Why do you think that lens flare cannot produce colours? |
|
|
|
Post by lionking on Nov 27, 2006 8:02:08 GMT -4
AS11-40-5863 to AS11-40-5869 don't show any sun . From where did NASA bring the photo of the sun?
|
|
|
|
Post by lionking on Nov 27, 2006 8:03:42 GMT -4
gwiz
with or without colors, it is appearing around strong light sources as happens on earth with atmosphere.
|
|
|
|
Post by grashtel on Nov 27, 2006 8:16:11 GMT -4
AS11-40-5863 to AS11-40-5869 don't show any sun . From where did NASA bring the photo of the sun? Good question, why don't you ask Ed Hengeveld, ie the guy who made the composite, its quite possible he put them in to make it look better as its nothing more than a publicity pic with no scientific value as its a composite of several other photos. The information about it from www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/frame.html is: |
|
|
|
Post by gwiz on Nov 27, 2006 8:18:13 GMT -4
gwiz with or without colors, it is appearing around strong light sources as happens on earth with atmosphere. It appears around a strong light source as happens on earth with lens flare. This is what a sun halo looks like: www.sundog.clara.co.uk/halo/circular.htm |
|
|
|
Post by lionking on Nov 27, 2006 8:22:03 GMT -4
|
|
