Craig Lamson Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 (edited) I still don't see the problem. The reflection of the photographer in the visor in the first post is about twice the size of the reflection of the astronaut in the apollo photo above. This is clearly due to the increased distance between the photographer and the visor. Where's the problem? As usual there seems to be a failure to communicate with you , which is usually the reason I don't even bother to reply to your one liner posts here . Here is the point of Jack's question . The astronaut reflected in the Apollo 12 photo is much further away from the visor he is reflected in than the astronot reflected in the Apollo 17 visor ... Yet the astronaut's reflection , which is FURTHER AWAY in the A12 photo is LARGER ... and the reflection of the astronaut that is CLOSER in the A17 photo , is SMALLER. It should be the opposite. Schmitt was allegedy only a few feet away from Cernan when he took that photo , yet his reflection looks MUCH TOO SMALL for someone being reflected that close . If you compare it to the photos that Gavin posted here at the top of the thread , you will see how large his reflection should have been , but wasn't . Here are the two images with the sizes normalized by using the crosshairs. As you can see Jack and Duane are the ones who have it totally backwards. The right image is clearly taken from a closer camera to subject distance than the left image. As such the size difference between the astronaut reflections of the two image is as to be expected. This is clearly a case of certain parties not knowing what they are looking at... Edited January 10, 2008 by Craig Lamson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 For some reason NASA only offers this particular photo in standard and not high res on their Apollo Image Gallery .... Maybe they're hoping that stage light reflection in the top right corner of the visor won't be quite as noticible in the standard photo ? .. If you can find the high res version elsewhere , that would be great . AS12-48-7071 http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/...2-48-7071HR.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin M. West Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 I still don't see the problem. The reflection of the photographer in the visor in the first post is about twice the size of the reflection of the astronaut in the apollo photo above. This is clearly due to the increased distance between the photographer and the visor. Where's the problem? As usual there seems to be a failure to communicate with you , which is usually the reason I don't even bother to reply to your one liner posts here . Here is the point of Jack's question . The astronaut reflected in the Apollo 12 photo is much further away from the visor he is reflected in than the astronot reflected in the Apollo 17 visor ... Yet the astronaut's reflection , which is FURTHER AWAY in the A12 photo is LARGER ... and the reflection of the astronaut that is CLOSER in the A17 photo , is SMALLER. It should be the opposite. Schmitt was allegedy only a few feet away from Cernan when he took that photo , yet his reflection looks MUCH TOO SMALL for someone being reflected that close . If you compare it to the photos that Gavin posted here at the top of the thread , you will see how large his reflection should have been , but wasn't . Duane, when I read your post, there was only one image. So that's the one I worked with. You added the second one while I was composing my post. I'd compare your two images, but it looks like it's already been done. As usual, Jack cropped the images so you can't see the whole picture, including the fact that he was using different size fiducials to normalize the images. Why do you keep supporting this guy when he keep posting such obviously false info? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Daman Posted January 11, 2008 Share Posted January 11, 2008 (edited) This has nothing to do with Jack trying to mislead anyone ... He simply asked a question about why the astronot looked smaller in the A17 visor reflection and larger in the A12 reflection , when the A17 astronot was supossedly standing much closer to the subject than the astronot showing the larger reflection in the A12 photo . According to what I've read in the past , Schmitt was standing much closer to Cernan when he allegedly took that A17 photo, than Bean was standing to Conrad when the A12 photo was taken . If this is not the case, then I would like to see the proof of that, instead of the typcal insulting character assassinations of both Jack and me . Also, the question has not been answered as to why Schmitt looks like a silly pointed head little dwarf in the A17 reflection, instead of a real person in a spacesuit . We can all see by the photos that Gavin posted at the beginning of this thread what a real person standing several feet away from a visor really looks like in it's reflection ... and the phony looking Apollo 17 Cernan/Schmitt photo doesn't even come close to looking like the real thing . Edited January 11, 2008 by Duane Daman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted January 11, 2008 Share Posted January 11, 2008 This has nothing to do with Jack trying to mislead anyone ... He simply asked a question about why the astronot looked smaller in the A17 visor reflection and larger in the A12 reflection , when the A17 astronot was supossedly standing much closer to the subject than the astronot showing the larger reflection in the A12 photo .Sure he asked a simple and quite ignorant question..a question that someone who has "reearched" the Apollo images whould have known...that the center cross hair is much larger than the outer crosshairs. It seem YOU also fall into this catagory as well. Also the misleading part, and thisis VERY common for Jack is to crop away much of the image...without posting image numbers or at least the full frame. According to what I've read in the past , Schmitt was standing much closer to Cernan when he allegedly took that A17 photo, than Bean was standing to Conrad when the A12 photo was taken . Well gee Duane how about backing that up with data, because the size normalized images tell us a different story. If this is not the case, then I would like to see the proof of that, instead of the typcal insulting character assassinations of both Jack and me . You attacked your OWN character Duane, by not doing the required research to understand what you were posting. As for the proof, ITS BEEN POSTED. If its beyond your ability to understand then either ask or take it upon yourself to learn the subject matter. If YOU do one of thise things YOU won't continue to attack your OWN character. Also, the question has not been answered as to why Schmitt looks like a silly pointed head little dwarf in the A17 reflection, instead of a real person in a spacesuit . We can all see by the photos that Gavin posted at the beginning of this thread what a real person standing several feet away from a visor really looks like in it's reflection ... and the phony looking Apollo 17 Cernan/Schmitt photo doesn't even come close to looking like the real thing . Really, based on what? Your mistaken observations? Sheeeh! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Daman Posted January 11, 2008 Share Posted January 11, 2008 (edited) As usual you haven't provided any proof to back up your claims but only use the same old tired tactic of ridiculing those you disagree with . The Cernan visor reflection is a ridiculous looking fake .... No real astronaut standing only a few feet away from the subject would look like "Schmitt" does in that reflection and you know it .... The photos at the top of this thread also prove that fact . At least the reflection on the Apollo 12 visor looks like a real person being reflected , even if quality control did forget to airbrush out that stagelight reflection in the top right corner of Conrad's visor. I will see if I can find out the distances of the "photographer's" to the subjects in both the A12 and the A17 photo sessions , because nothing you have posted here has convinced me that something isn't wrong with the different sizes of the reflected astronots. What's the matter Craig ? ... Nothing worth looking at on the tube today in your very rich and full life ? Edited January 11, 2008 by Duane Daman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted January 11, 2008 Share Posted January 11, 2008 (edited) As usual you haven't provided any proof to back up your claims but only use the same old tired tactic of ridiculing those you disagree with .Yes I have, I've posted the size normalized images wiht show the huge difference in camera to subject distance in the two images. I'm guess you simply don't understand how this works, as usual. The Cernan visor reflection is a ridiculous looking fake .... No real astronaut standing only a few feet away from the subject would look like "Schmitt" does in that reflection and you know it .... The photos at the top of this thread also prove that fact . No the apollo photos show what we would expect to see given the differences in camera to subject distances. Once again the subject matter flies over your head. At least the reflection on the Apollo 12 visor looks like a real person being reflected , even if quality control did forget to airbrush out that stagelight reflection in the top right corner of Conrad's visor. What you mean that dust smudge you are mistaking for some crude form of "stagelight" I would think after your complete embarrassment the last time you claimed "footlights" you would have learned your lesson. I will see if I can find out the distances of the "photographer's" to the subjects in both the A12 and the A17 photo sessions , because nothing you have posted here has convinced me that something isn't wrong with the different sizes of the reflected astronots. Please be my quest and post the results and the source. It should be VERY interesting. What's the matter Craig ? ... Nothing worth looking at on the tube today in your very rich and full life ? I'm at work Duane, preparing to send a packet of my samples to a national client, and enjoying an otherwise relaxing Friday...and getting my daily yucks reading all the kook's postings. Life is good. Edited January 11, 2008 by Craig Lamson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted January 11, 2008 Share Posted January 11, 2008 I had a look at the two images, side by side. They are AS12-48-7071 (left) and AS17-134-20385 (right). Comparison of AS12-48-7071 (left) and AS17-134-20385 (right), with inset copy of visor area from AS17-134-20385 As you can see, they appear to be taken from about the same distance (there is a small difference). I have copied the visor section of the image on the right and placed it next to the visor on the left so you can compare the size of the reflections. Here is an enlarged crop of that section: As you can see, the reflected figures in each of the images is about the same size. This comparison used the standard, and not hi-res, versions of the images. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Daman Posted January 11, 2008 Share Posted January 11, 2008 I'm at work Duane, preparing to send a packet of my samples to a national client, and enjoying an otherwise relaxing Friday...and getting my daily yucks reading all the kook's postings. Life is good. Oh so now you're at "work" instead of searching for something worth looking at on the 'tube" Sorry old boy but the only work you know how to do is be a predator on the Education Forum and a part time BS artist on Apollo hoax forum among your gullible peers . What you mean that dust smudge you are mistaking for some crude form of "stagelight" I would think after your complete embarrassment the last time you claimed "footlights" you would have learned your lesson. If you REALLY believe a "dust smudge" HAS THE EXACT SAME SHAPE AND APPEARANCE OF A STAGE LIGHT , then I can see why you have been fooled by NASA's phony Apollo photographs . I would think for a professional photographer who actually assisted NASA in the making of the ALSJ, that you would be able to tell the dfference between a faked photo from a real one when you see it ... but obviously not . Gosh, I hope you weren't brainwashed with that "TRAIN-QUILITY " drug along with all those Apollo astronots !! .. If so , that might explain why you can't tell the difference between a "dust smudge" and a stage light reflection . Oh and thanks for finding and posting the high resolution photo of that A12 stagelight reflected in Conrad's visor ... It really does show up much better in the high res version of that phony photo , doesn't it ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Daman Posted January 11, 2008 Share Posted January 11, 2008 (edited) As you can see, the reflected figures in each of the images is about the same size. NOT EVEN CLOSE . Look at the sizes of the astronot reflections again ... The A17 reflection doesn't even look like a real astronot and the position looks much too low in the visor as well . According to the DAC footage of this scene , Schmitt was standing only a few feet away from Cernan and they were both on level ground .... So that would make that A17 visor reflection image of the astronot a crude superimposed fake . Edited January 11, 2008 by Duane Daman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted January 11, 2008 Share Posted January 11, 2008 (edited) I'm at work Duane, preparing to send a packet of my samples to a national client, and enjoying an otherwise relaxing Friday...and getting my daily yucks reading all the kook's postings. Life is good. Oh so now you're at "work" instead of searching for something worth looking at on the 'tube" Sorry old boy but the only work you know how to do is be a predator on the Education Forum and a part time BS artist on Apollo hoax forum among your gullible peers . I'll leave it for my customers to decide if I work or not. What you mean that dust smudge you are mistaking for some crude form of "stagelight" I would think after your complete embarrassment the last time you claimed "footlights" you would have learned your lesson. If you REALLY believe a "dust smudge" HAS THE EXACT SAME SHAPE AND APPEARANCE OF A STAGE LIGHT , then I can see why you have been fooled by NASA's phony Apollo photographs . Well no it does not have "the exact same shape and size and appearance of a stagelight". That some THINK it appears to be a stagelight is because of their overworked and silly worldview driven imagination. I would think for a professional photographer who actually assisted NASA in the making of the ALSJ, that you would be able to tell the dfference between a faked photo from a real one when you see it ... but obviously not . Duane, I've never assisted NASA with anything. You need to get your story correct. Now you are a disinformationist. But its exactly my training as a professional studio photographer and my skill at altering photography that allows to to understand tha the Apollo images are not fakes. You on the other hand are limited to parroting the claims of others and being forced to take them on faith. Gosh, I hope you weren't brainwashed with that "TRAIN-QUILITY " drug along with all those Apollo astronots !! .. If so , that might explain why you can't tell the difference between a "dust smudge" and a stage light reflection . I understand what smudges look like becasue I've produced them with the photographic process and studied them. You on the other hand along with your leaders are limited to handwaving. Oh and thanks for finding and posting the high resolution photo of that A12 stagelight reflected in Conrad's visor ... It really does show up much better in the high res version of that phony photo , doesn't it ? Yes it does and it allows the intellectually honest to see that its just a smudge. Edited January 11, 2008 by Craig Lamson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted January 11, 2008 Share Posted January 11, 2008 (edited) I had a look at the two images, side by side. They are AS12-48-7071 (left) and AS17-134-20385 (right). Comparison of AS12-48-7071 (left) and AS17-134-20385 (right), with inset copy of visor area from AS17-134-20385 As you can see, they appear to be taken from about the same distance (there is a small difference). I have copied the visor section of the image on the right and placed it next to the visor on the left so you can compare the size of the reflections. Here is an enlarged crop of that section: As you can see, the reflected figures in each of the images is about the same size. This comparison used the standard, and not hi-res, versions of the images. Sorry Evan but they were not taken from anywhere near the same camera to subject distance. The A17 helmet is about 20% smaller than the A12 helmet which indicates a change in distance. Added on edit: The A17 photo shows the astronaut reflection to be about 35% smaller than the A12 reflection. Thats a bit more tha the 20% reduction in size of the A17 Visor. However I think the sizes are a perfect fit considering this: 118:26:08 Cernan: Try that one time, then we'll give up and get to work. (Long Pause) [Jack holds the camera in his hand and gets it as low to the ground as he can without kneeling.] 1 18:26:26 Cernan: Point it up a little...Yeah. (Pause) [This is AS17-134- 20385.] Edited January 11, 2008 by Craig Lamson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Daman Posted January 11, 2008 Share Posted January 11, 2008 Sorry Evan but they were not taken from anywhere near the same camera to subject distance. The A17 helmet is about 20% smaller than the A12 helmet which indicates a change in distance. Thanks for finally answering Jack's question and proving his evidence is correct . I'm afraid that quoting from the ALSJ won't help you with this one either .... Schmitt stood closer to Cernan in the A17 photo than Bean did to Conrad in the Apollo 12 photo , which proves that the visor reflection in the Apollo 17 visor is a load of NASA baloney because the little dwarf astronot is much too small and weird looking to be a real reflection of an astronot standing only a few feet away from the visor he is allegedly reflected in . Look at the photos Gavin posted at the beginning of this thread again which show what people really look like reflected in a visor while standing only a few feet away from it .... and then try to convince yourself that the little dwarf in the A17 visor is real . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted January 11, 2008 Share Posted January 11, 2008 Sorry Evan but they were not taken from anywhere near the same camera to subject distance. The A17 helmet is about 20% smaller than the A12 helmet which indicates a change in distance.Added on edit: The A17 photo shows the astronaut reflection to be about 35% smaller than the A12 reflection. Thats a bit more tha the 20% reduction in size of the A17 Visor. However I think the sizes are a perfect fit considering this: 118:26:08 Cernan: Try that one time, then we'll give up and get to work. (Long Pause) [Jack holds the camera in his hand and gets it as low to the ground as he can without kneeling.] 1 18:26:26 Cernan: Point it up a little...Yeah. (Pause) [This is AS17-134- 20385.] I thought they looked about the same distance. I didn't check which lens were being used, etc, just a rough assessment. Ref the visor image: what are you taking as the astronaut? I am using part of the smudge. I'll check the hi-res version and see if I am wrong. Cheers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted January 11, 2008 Share Posted January 11, 2008 Ooops - you are right. I should have used the hi-res version; the astronaut is a lot smaller in the Apollo 17 colour image. Can you take me through how you determine that the distance are different? At first glance they seem to be about the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now