Jack White Posted November 2, 2006 Share Posted November 2, 2006 Another unexplained oddity in moonpic. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted November 4, 2006 Share Posted November 4, 2006 Jack you should know the drill by now what is the image number? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted November 5, 2006 Share Posted November 5, 2006 The photo number is AS17-134-20380 from Apollo 17 .... Here is the original photo before it was zoomed in , enlarged and cropped by me , to send to Mr. White to study . .... I asked Jack if he could figure out what these three lights reflected in Cernan's visor might be ... I assumed they might be some type of stage lighting , otherwise known as footlights or when used outdoors, spike lights .... I don't believe them to be reflective lights off of anything that would have been on the moon , as the lunar buggy and the LM are clearly behind Cernan when this photo was taken . And here is the image in question again with my annotation . They appear to be highlights from the sun as the sun hits scratches on the surface of the visor. I've seen this happen quite often while doing interior photographs of RV's and having a mirror with etched lines and a light at the right angle. If they were fill lights of some sort there would be a BUNCH of other signs...such as specular highlights elsewhere and more importhantly THREE MORE SHADOWS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted November 6, 2006 Share Posted November 6, 2006 Mr. Lamson ... Yes , I have heard the "scratches on the visor" theory before but it doesn't wash at all .... Do you realize how many visors scratches there must have been on all of the visors from all of the missions ? ... Yet this photo is the ONLY ONE which shows these types of visor light reflections .Shadows ? .... You have to be kidding me..... Shadows would only appear if it was an overhead light shining directly down on the astronaut being reflected in the visor .... Footlights which are directed in an upwards position would not cast any shadows on the ground . If you look closely , you can even see the the elongagted back holders which are spiked into the ground underneath the light sources . But if you would like to post some Apollo photos here which show any visor scratches causing these types of lights in any of the other visor reflections , then I might be more willing to accept your theory .... Otherwise I think it's pretty obvious what really caused these three light reflections to show up in Cernan's visor .... Footlights on a moon set . Your understanding of light and shadow is a bit lacking Sir. Unless you have some experience in this area of photography please refrain from telling me what shadows will and will not do. My daily working experience is based entirely on the creation of studio photographic lighting and I have done so for almost three decades. Now you statement that: "Shadows ? .... You have to be kidding me..... Shadows would only appear if it was an overhead light shining directly down on the astronaut being reflected in the visor .... Footlights which are directed in an upwards position would not cast any shadows on the ground ." ...is baseless in this situation. First even "footlights directed in an upwards position CAN cause shadows on the ground, but that really means nothing in the case. For your "theory" that the specular highlights in the visor are from footlights to have ANY validity you must go beyond the "I believe" stage and offer us some real proof that such lights were used. That proof would be TRIPLE SHADOWS anywhere on the spacesuit that is in shadow from the sun. IF there were "footlights" those shadows WOULD HAVE TO EXIST! This is simple studio lighting 101. In addition if there WERE FOOTLIGHTS there would also be specular highlights on the shiny surfaces of the spacesuit. The easiest place to look for such highlights are the chrome snaps placed at various places on the spacesuit. They offer us a great view of the light falling on that area of the spacesuit since they are convex mirrors. None of these snaps show any signs of three "footlights" Again this is studio lighting 101. Scratches on the visor were common on all missions. Why not? The gold visor (the one in question) was raised and lowered as were the three visor shades. These lexan plastic visors were raised and lowered with the gloved hand of the astronaut...gloved hands that where COVERED with abrasive lunar dust. For these shadows to show in a photograph we need a couple of things. First we need for the sun to light these scratches from exactly the right angle for them to show up in the photograph. This again is basic Studio Lighting 101. Next we need to have photographs that were MADE in the correct lighting and that are IN FOCUS for these scratches to be visible. Having reviewed ALL of the high res images taken just before and after the frame in question, I have not been able find any additional images that are in focus, have the right lighting nor being close enough to resolve the scratches. That however does not eliminate that the highlights on the visor along with what appears top be three scratches are in fact scratches with highlights. So what are we left with here. You state you "believe" that what you see in the visor are three additional lights added to the scene. You offer no evidence of this other than your "belief". As stated in your you have NO STUDIO LIGHING EXPERIENCE from which to base your claim. But based on this lack of solid evidence ( in fact no evidence at all) you tell us: "Otherwise I think it's pretty obvious what really caused these three light reflections to show up in Cernan's visor .... Footlights on a moon set ." On the other hand we have the lack of any shadows or highlights anywhere else in this image and these WOULD BE REQUIRED if there were in fact three additional lights used in this image. Studio Lighting 101. Also it’s a simple fact of photographic lighting that a light hitting a scratch of other indentation on a reflective surface will case a specular highlight. Studio lLghting 101 again. It happened to me just last week when photographing an rv bedroom with a large etched mirror. Simple fact of physics. We also have Lexan visors being handled by abrasive gloves...scratches happen. Such as can be seen here: http://dayton.hq.nasa.gov/IMAGES/LARGE/GPN-2000-001428.jpg Bottom line, the evidence is convincing that the highlights in question are being caused by scratches. You have offered no evidence what so ever other than your uninformed belief that the highlights in question are being caused by “footlights”. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Ulman Posted November 6, 2006 Share Posted November 6, 2006 (edited) Mr. Lamson ... Yes , I have heard the "scratches on the visor" theory before but it doesn't wash at all .... Do you realize how many visors scratches there must have been on all of the visors from all of the missions ? ... Yet this photo is the ONLY ONE which shows these types of visor light reflections .Shadows ? .... You have to be kidding me..... Shadows would only appear if it was an overhead light shining directly down on the astronaut being reflected in the visor .... Footlights which are directed in an upwards position would not cast any shadows on the ground . If you look closely , you can even see the the elongagted back holders which are spiked into the ground underneath the light sources . But if you would like to post some Apollo photos here which show any visor scratches causing these types of lights in any of the other visor reflections , then I might be more willing to accept your theory .... Otherwise I think it's pretty obvious what really caused these three light reflections to show up in Cernan's visor .... Footlights on a moon set . Duane- Where are the extra 3 shadows on the front of Cernan's suit? In the real world, your 3 fill lights would cast additional shadows on his suit from the RCU. Please point them out to me, because I don't see any. Also, explain why the "Footlights on a moon set" don't show up in any of the other 7 photos taken around the same time.(forget looking at AS17-134-20383 - does not contain a full visor) Here is the photo sequence from the time period of AS17-134-20380: AS17-134-20376 118:18:20 EVA-1 AS17-134-20377 118:23:25 EVA-1 AS17-134-20378 118:23:20 EVA-1 AS17-134-20379 118:23:20 EVA-1 AS17-134-20380 118:23:20 EVA-1 Gene borrows the camera to take Jack's portrait with the flag. AS17-134-20381 118:25:18 EVA-1 AS17-134-20382 118:25:18 EVA-1 AS17-134-20383 118:25:18 EVA-1 AS17-134-20384 118:25:54 EVA-1 Edited November 6, 2006 by Steve Ulman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Ulman Posted November 7, 2006 Share Posted November 7, 2006 Duane- Just where do you believe the "fill" lights are pointed" If they weren't pointing at Cernen, why are they there in the first place? If the whole thing is a carefully conceived hoax, why didn't they just throw out an obvious blunder? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Ulman Posted November 7, 2006 Share Posted November 7, 2006 Mr. Ulman ... If you look at the photo again you will see that the footlights are pointed up and away from Cernan ... I have no idea why the lights would have been positioned as they were but my guess would be to illuminate the scene in front of Cernan , which is being reflected in his visor .... And I would imagine the lights were not air brushed out of his visor reflection or the photo thrown out , for possibly two reasons ... Either the fill lights were not caught by those responsible for eliminating any possible anomalies in the Apollo photos , or they were left in deliberately by whistle blowers to be found 37 years later by me ! ... Duane- You can't have it both ways. If the lights were used to illuminate scene in front of Cernan then they would be pointing towards him, not up and away. If they were pointed towards him, you would see additional shadows on the front of his suit behind the RCU. The truth is that I don’t have a clear explanation for what the spots of light are. In scientific research, total knowledge is not required, however, if you don’t know something you are required to state that fact. I have seen absolutely no evidence of additional “fill” lighting in any of the hundreds of Apollo photographs I’ve viewed. Based on that fact, and the fact that Craig is a Professional Photographer, I’m willing to accept his explanation as the likely cause, until such time as better evidence is presented. That said, please provide, or at least a logical explanation, with verifiable sources, that the three spots are indeed “fill” lights and why there is only one image of them. Simply saying “someone forgot to airbrush them out”, is not evidence. Also, the argument that you can see enough detain in the photo to see “stands”, but there is not enough detail to see the additional shadows, would require quite a bit of evidence, testing, comparative photographs, etc. to prove you are correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Ulman Posted November 8, 2006 Share Posted November 8, 2006 Steve ... On the contrary ... If the footlights were used to illuninate the scene in front of Cernan ( the other astronaut and mountain backdrop reflected in the visor ) but not Cernan himself , then they would be pointed up and AWAY from him , as we can see in the photo... thus causing no shadows near or around the subject being photographed at all . Duane- If they were indeed pointed away from him, why do we see the bright spots? Please provide data on the type of lighting units that would produce the effects we see. Also, why would there 3 lights situated together to provide "fill" lighting? Such a grouping would most likley produce a hot spot. Wouldn't they have been spaced out to produce a more even brightness level? Also, when was the last time you viewed a stage production that used stand mounted lighting? (Except for effect) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted November 10, 2006 Share Posted November 10, 2006 Steve ... The lights are pointed up and away from Cernan but not to the point where they can't be seen in his visor reflection ... as we can all see very clearly in this photo.Why they are clumped together as they are would be anybody's guess ... I would assume they were used to light various areas of the set and were placed where they are for a good reason though . What type of stage production would use footlights? ... Almost all .... What type of stage production would use outdoor spike lights to illuminate the set ? ... A very large outdoor one ! Here is a picture of the type of light that I am talking about .... It is of course not identical but very close in it's construction , having an elongated black holder which spikes into the ground . Your arms are waving wildly but its still not going to fly Duane. IF THE LIGHT CAN STRIKE THE VISOR>>>IT MUST LEAVE A SHADOW! I'm afraid you have been DEBUNKED! Smple scratches on the Cernan visor being struck at the correct angle to produce a specular highlight...and it looks EXACTLY like the SINGLE scratch in the Apollo 12 image....try again next time. Three images enclosed, the Cernan visor scratches on the left, the Apollo 12 SINGLE visor scratch on the right and finally a rv mirror with beveled recessed lines photographed by me as proof of concept. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Greer Posted November 10, 2006 Share Posted November 10, 2006 Pericynthion posted the following on the Unexplained Mysteries website which should clear this up once and for all. He doesn't have posting rights here, so has asked me to post it for him. His original post can be found here - http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum...0669&st=161 All the words beloe are his own, not mine. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ This is a crop of the image in question, AS17-134-20380. There has been much discussion as to whether the bright streaks and spots on the Gene's visor are scratches or some sort of stage lighting. I side with the group that contends they are just scratches. It occurred to me a few days ago that we have more potential evidence to examine than just the Apollo 17 lunar surface photos. Gene Cernan's suit and LEVA (visor) assembly were returned to Earth and are currently on public display at the National Air and Space Museum (link). If the features in the above image are indeed scratches on the visor, they should still exist and may be visible on the displayed suit. After a bit of digging on the web, I found this image of Gene's suit at the museum: The above photo is taken from flickr.com and credited to photographer dalesmidt. It is listed as a public photo, so I consider my reprint of a portion of the photo here to be fair use under flickr's Creative Commons policy. The full photo can be found here). I've circled a set of three scratches on the visor which appear to be a perfect match in size, location, and orientation to the features seen in AS17-134-20380. While it is certainly possible that additional scratches have appeared on the visor during its years of storage and display, it would seem extremely unlikely that they would match so closely to the pattern seen in the original photo. I believe this is pretty strong evidence that the features seen in the Apollo photo are truly just scratches on the visor. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Nuff said? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted November 10, 2006 Share Posted November 10, 2006 (edited) Manipulating the image is a nice trick but it just doesn't fly ... So I do believe it would be you who is waving wildly here , not I ... Why be so deceptive with your evidence ? Why not post the original Apollo 17 photo next to the original Apollo 12 photo and then see how much they look alike ? ... I'll tell you why you won't ... It's because they look NOTHING alike and you know it . I'm afraid you are just as dishonest and as deceptive as the corrupt organization you defend so adamently ... NASA ( NEVER A STRAIGHT ANSWER ) ... Just like you . Just how much bandwidth do we need to waste here, reposting images that are availabe to anybody who wants to see them with a simple click of the mouse? The full image of the A17 shot was posted on this thread, You were given the link to the A12 shot and you said you looked at it ( and said you found the scratches and highlights were dis-similar). So there is no deception, I simply posted crops of both scratches so you could not miss them. No manipulation at all, unless you call cropping manipulation and we know that is not the case because we have your words on this very forum defending Jack's cropping of images. Now of course you have both images available and you with little effort could prove I have manipulated these images if that were the case, but the simple fact is you can"t because the images have not been manipulated...only cropped from the original. So just who's arms are waving wildly and who is being dishonest here? Why that would be you Duane. Edited November 10, 2006 by Craig Lamson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted November 10, 2006 Share Posted November 10, 2006 Pericynthion posted the following on the Unexplained Mysteries website which should clear this up once and for all. He doesn't have posting rights here, so has asked me to post it for him.His original post can be found here - http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum...0669&st=161 All the words beloe are his own, not mine. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ This is a crop of the image in question, AS17-134-20380. There has been much discussion as to whether the bright streaks and spots on the Gene's visor are scratches or some sort of stage lighting. I side with the group that contends they are just scratches. It occurred to me a few days ago that we have more potential evidence to examine than just the Apollo 17 lunar surface photos. Gene Cernan's suit and LEVA (visor) assembly were returned to Earth and are currently on public display at the National Air and Space Museum (link). If the features in the above image are indeed scratches on the visor, they should still exist and may be visible on the displayed suit. After a bit of digging on the web, I found this image of Gene's suit at the museum: The above photo is taken from flickr.com and credited to photographer dalesmidt. It is listed as a public photo, so I consider my reprint of a portion of the photo here to be fair use under flickr's Creative Commons policy. The full photo can be found here). I've circled a set of three scratches on the visor which appear to be a perfect match in size, location, and orientation to the features seen in AS17-134-20380. While it is certainly possible that additional scratches have appeared on the visor during its years of storage and display, it would seem extremely unlikely that they would match so closely to the pattern seen in the original photo. I believe this is pretty strong evidence that the features seen in the Apollo photo are truly just scratches on the visor. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Nuff said? Excellent work, Dave! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted November 10, 2006 Share Posted November 10, 2006 (edited) Pericynthion posted the following on the Unexplained Mysteries website which should clear this up once and for all. He doesn't have posting rights here, so has asked me to post it for him.SNIP Nuff said? OUCH..thats gonna leave a mark! Edited November 10, 2006 by Craig Lamson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Greer Posted November 10, 2006 Share Posted November 10, 2006 Excellent work, Dave! Wish I could claim it for my own, but it's all Pericynthion's off UM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted November 10, 2006 Share Posted November 10, 2006 Excellent work, Dave! Wish I could claim it for my own, but it's all Pericynthion's off UM. No, I mean excellent work in finding it! 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