Jack White Posted July 9, 2009 Author Share Posted July 9, 2009 There are lots of ways to light photographs.Jack I don't think this explanation explains this image from Apollo 14 very well. Explain this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted July 9, 2009 Share Posted July 9, 2009 Don't change the subject, Jack. Dave has you cornered; deal with the topic at hand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin M. West Posted July 9, 2009 Share Posted July 9, 2009 If he is turned sideways as your phony study shows, how did he take the photowith a chest mounted camera? Show us the camera. Jack It's hard to tell with so few pixels, but it appears to be in his right hand, held up near his visor. You know the cameras were not always chest mounted, they were detachable. I disagree with you on that one Kevin. See my explanation to Jack above. I think you're right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin M. West Posted July 9, 2009 Share Posted July 9, 2009 Explain this. Do you even own a camera? Go point it at the sun, see how big the sun looks in the resulting image. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Greer Posted July 9, 2009 Share Posted July 9, 2009 Explain this. Jack The rationale behind my rebuttal of your first study goes a long way to explaining why your second is flawed. Your latest study is based on a false assumption, that the size of the over-exposed glare equates to the size of the sun. This has already been discussed in great detail in this thread back in Nov 2007, and in this thread from May of the same year. I think this study I did some time ago puts the whole "wrong sun size" claim to rest, unless anyone can explain why it's wrong. 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