Lighting experiments

[Bob B.]

I just bought my first digital camera a few days ago so I thought I'd try a few experiments to put the HB claims to the test. Below are a couple shots I took of a model LM. The only light source in these photos is a spotlight behind the LM that is angled about 20-degrees. Despite this backlighting, the front of the LM has received enough reflected illumination to reveal considerable detail.

www.braeunig.us/pics/LM-01.jpg

www.braeunig.us/pics/LM-02.jpg


Compare these photos with this one; I think you'll see a striking similarity:

www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/frame/?AS14-66-9306


EDIT: Replaced hotlinks with URLs to save bandwidth.

[Kiwi]

Good one, Bob.

What is the "lunar surface" material? It looks like a dark-coloured shiny plastic sheet, so may reflect less light back onto the LM than the real lunar surface.

It would be interesting to see two shots exposed the same as the astronauts did: One shot taken of the back of the model and correctly exposed, and another shot taken of the front, but the aperture manually opened up three (or was it four?) stops. I'm assuming that you can adjust those electronic things the same as real cameras!

White, Percy and others have often claimed that it's "impossible" to lighten up the front of the LM the way the astronauts often did it. According to my 37 years' experience in photography it's not impossible at all. I sometimes feel a tad aggreived at those so-called experts spouting their nonsense.

[Bob B.]

kiwi said:

What is the "lunar surface" material? It looks like a dark-coloured shiny plastic sheet

That's exactly what it is. In fact, it's a photograph of lunar soil printed on a plastic sheet.

It would be interesting to see two shots exposed the same as the astronauts did: One shot taken of the back of the model and correctly exposed, and another shot taken of the front, but the aperture manually opened up three (or was it four?) stops. I'm assuming that you can adjust those electronic things the same as real cameras!

My camera does have the settings to do what you suggest. I'll give it a try when I get a chance.

[Bob B.]

I'm sure many of you have seen this image:

www.forteantimes.com/articles/094/moon07.jpg

I recently got into an argument with somebody at GLP Forum who refused to believe ground slope could be responsible for the shadow angles. He challenged me to prove it ...

www.braeunig.us/pics/shadow03.jpg

Look strangely similar, don't they?


EDIT: Replaced hotlinks with URLs to save bandwidth.

[Kiwi]

Don't these guys ever observe their environment? At this time of the year, winter, I can often view the shadow of a perfectly straight power pole snaking gently from side to side across my front lawn. Why? Because of undulations in the lawn or varying grass lengths.

Here are more excellent real-life examples of the so-called lunar photograph anomalies:

www3.telus.net/summa/moonshot/main.htm

Click on the thumbnails to see more examples and explanations.

[jaydeehess]

Nice stuff Bob, you have kewl toys. ;D

Kiwi, priceless site, I have only read one part (lines of convergence) but I am blown away by the guy.

[Bob B.]

kiwi said:

Here are more excellent real-life examples of the so-called lunar photograph anomalies:

www3.telus.net/summa/moonshot/main.htm

I have a link to this site on my Web page. The guy has done some really nice work.