|
|
Post by djw001 on Jan 1, 2011 13:49:15 GMT -4
Although Bill Keel's webpage on "Independent Observations of the Apollo Missions" is excellent, I think it would be great if we could send out an appeal to amateur astronomers active at the time to submit photographs they took of the orbiting spacecraft, ideally including the usual date/time/exposure data. Hoax Believers are quick to dismiss photographs taken by professional astronomers, as they are clearly "in on it." A few dozen photos from students, dentists, High School teachers and others from around the world might serve at least to put things in perspective. Anyone here a member of an amateur astronomy net that might be able to help start gathering this primary source material?
|
|
|
|
Post by supermeerkat on Jan 1, 2011 22:16:33 GMT -4
That's a really neat idea and it would be a great addition to any Apollo resources, but the tinfoil hat wearing lunatics (pun intended) wouldn't accept ANY evidence from anyone.
|
|
|
|
Post by lukepemberton on Jan 1, 2011 22:34:46 GMT -4
That's a really neat idea and it would be a great addition to any Apollo resources, but the tinfoil hat wearing lunatics (pun intended) wouldn't accept ANY evidence from anyone. They will keep moving the goalposts. |
|
|
|
Post by chew on Jan 1, 2011 23:10:22 GMT -4
Yeah. They'd just say the amateurs captured pictures of the fake spacecraft NASA sent up to facilitate the hoax (ala "medium Earth orbit" satellites to relay communications between Mission Control and the astronauts in Area 51 so tracking stations wouldn't suspect a hoax.)
But screw the HBs. I'd love to see those pictures.
|
|
|
|
Post by Data Cable on Jan 2, 2011 0:29:45 GMT -4
Yeah. They'd just say the amateurs captured pictures of the fake spacecraft NASA sent up to facilitate the hoax... Or even simpler, that the "amateurs" are actually NASA shills providing faked photographs. |
|
|
|
Post by djw001 on Jan 2, 2011 11:14:42 GMT -4
It doesn't matter what hoax believers think, the point is that it would be invaluable historical documentation.
|
|
|
|
Post by djw001 on Oct 27, 2011 11:10:27 GMT -4
I'm just bumping this in the hopes that someone will respond.
|
|
|
|
Post by tedward on Oct 27, 2011 11:48:15 GMT -4
Just wondering how many observed with the Mk1 and how many had a camera on the end. It would have been film as well with the obvious issues time throws at us, not degradation as such but stuffed away in a box and forgotten about. I keep all mine I take today but then they are digital, they are handy to see the meta data and hopefully get it right next time. Bit different with film I think?
|
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on Oct 27, 2011 11:55:29 GMT -4
It doesn't matter what hoax believers think, the point is that it would be invaluable historical documentation. Which I think is more important. |
|
|
|
Post by nightfever on Nov 1, 2011 12:05:12 GMT -4
Does anyone have any that they should post?
|
|
|
|
Post by nightfever on Nov 1, 2011 12:05:34 GMT -4
*could
|
|
|
|
Post by echnaton on Nov 1, 2011 14:10:29 GMT -4
|
|
|
|
Post by djw001 on Nov 5, 2011 19:28:15 GMT -4
Yes, very nice, but I'm thinking more along the lines of early satellites and spacecraft. Quite a few astrophotographs were probably "ruined" by passing spacecraft. It would be great if we could archive them by date and mission. |
|
|
|
Post by zakalwe on Jan 27, 2012 7:06:37 GMT -4
Yes, very nice, but I'm thinking more along the lines of early satellites and spacecraft. Quite a few astrophotographs were probably "ruined" by passing spacecraft. It would be great if we could archive them by date and mission. Imaging Earth's manmade satellites is very, very tricky. Just look at how fast the ISS passes overhead...it takes a matter of seconds for it to go horizon to horizon. So any manmade satellites's trail on any exposures would have minimal impact, assuming that it was in the FOV in the first place (have a look at Thierry Legault's page and the kit he uses to image earth's close companions. Deep Sky Photography, would, in the main, be fairly limited in the late 60's. DSO imaging (at an amateur level) has only really taken off in fairly recent years, as digital imaging allows us to "stack" multiple images to bring out the very faint DSO objects (I recently imaged the M42 nebula and used 2 hours worth of 200 second exposures. Image below). This type of imaging just was not available in the 60s. On another session (200 seconds exposures) a plane went through the field of view......and that is moving a heck of a lot slower, and a heck of a lot lower than anything in orbit.  (click for larger image) I'd be very, very surprised if there were many images from this time available.  |
|
|
|
Post by ka9q on Jan 27, 2012 9:19:51 GMT -4
Nice picture. What's your aperture?
|
|
