Jump to content
The Education Forum

Image Compositing Used to Fake Apollo Photos


Duane Daman
 Share

Recommended Posts

I found this example of how NASA used image compositing to fake some of their Apollo photos.

"And here is another example of NASA image tampering. It was found by Researchers Easynow and Jose Escamilla and it shows a ridiculous amount of manipulation, which Easynow has highlighted for us. I don't think Easynow could believe what Jose had found - many of us could not, so the mad genius got the image and checked for himself

This is what he found:"

shtfmoonfakebackgorund.png

(This image is as fake as all get out. Most of it isn't even real):

http://www.theusofe.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=9995

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 177
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

"There are great ideas, undiscovered breakthroughs available, to those who can remove one of truths protective layers"

-Neil Armstrong

Neil Armstrong made that cryptic statement during one of his college speeches, discussing Apollo and future manned space flight.

If Apollo was really the transparent, public space program that NASA and it's defenders would have us believe it was, then Mr. Armstrong's speech would have been very different.. So would his reluctance to speak publicly about his participation in The Apollo Program.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This image is interesting. It looks like the traces of cloning (from left to right) or some similar feature, of the sky. I'd like to have this explained. Off hand, perhaps a cosmetic removal of lens flare? Whatever it is, it is clumsy, indicating to me a lack of professionlity. If the intent was to decieve there are far better ways. Are there other images with this feature present? Obviously it is not a proof of any compositing but that the image has been retouched. That is all one can say at this moment imo.

Edited by John Dolva
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This image is interesting. It looks like the traces of cloning (from left to right) or some similar feature, of the sky. I'd like to have this explained. Off hand, perhaps a cosmetic removal of lens flare? Whatever it is, it is clumsy, indicating to me a lack of professionlity. If the intent was to decieve there are far better ways. Are there other images with this feature present? Obviously it is not a proof of any compositing but that the image has been retouched. That is all one can say at this moment imo.

This is not the first instance has been found where a scan with a weak black background has been retouched to look better. Many of the apollo image sites such as the Apollo Image Gallery are NOT NASA sites. Here is the owner of the Apollo Image Gallery, Kipp Teague explaining.

"Hi Craig. First of all, this is not "NASA's Apollo Image Gallery," this is MY Apollo Image Gallery ( http://www.apolloarchive.com/apollo_gallery.html ). I process the NASA-supplied imagery for presentation, and the JPG images themselves ultimately reside on a NASA server where they are mutually linked into my site's gallery as well as that of the NASA-hosted Apollo Lunar Surface Gallery. What has occurred over time is that the original Hasselblad negative rolls were re-scanned in higher resolution, and these are the images currently in the gallery. These images in many cases replaced older scans of NASA 8x10 prints, which were of varying quality, and more importantly, varying tonal balance."

Things to note: SCANNED FROM PRINTS.

If Duane and his band of merry men can show the original transparency or negative is altered they may have something. Finding a retouched image...ON THE INTERNET...not much more to say is there?

Edited by Craig Lamson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

John

Many of the Apollo images are available as very high resolution scans taken directly from film rolls, with no processing applied, from the Gateway to Astronaut Photography website. The images available at most other sites, for example the Apollo Lunar Surface Journal, have been editted in order to improve the appearance of the image (minor cropping, improved contrast, scanner noise removed from sky, etc).

If we take the image in question, you can find the link to the very high resolution image on this page (click on the link, 5 minutes later the image should be available from the server). Compare it to the highest resolution version at the ALSJ (click here). You can see the improved contrast, darkened sky etc very well (even though the original scan is of higher resolution). I've tried applying various filters and other techniques to both the ALSJ and "Gateway" versions of this image, but can't see the kind of detail shown in the version Duane has brought up for discussion. As we don't know what site it came from, we don't know the provenance, and can't contact them to see what processing was done to the image to create the effect seen. Maybe if Duane could supply the link to the URL this image came from (pre-processing), and also details of what processing was done to the image we could investigate further.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you, Dave.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John

Many of the Apollo images are available as very high resolution scans taken directly from film rolls, with no processing applied, from the Gateway to Astronaut Photography website. The images available at most other sites, for example the Apollo Lunar Surface Journal, have been editted in order to improve the appearance of the image (minor cropping, improved contrast, scanner noise removed from sky, etc).

If we take the image in question, you can find the link to the very high resolution image on this page (click on the link, 5 minutes later the image should be available from the server). Compare it to the highest resolution version at the ALSJ (click here). You can see the improved contrast, darkened sky etc very well (even though the original scan is of higher resolution). I've tried applying various filters and other techniques to both the ALSJ and "Gateway" versions of this image, but can't see the kind of detail shown in the version Duane has brought up for discussion. As we don't know what site it came from, we don't know the provenance, and can't contact them to see what processing was done to the image to create the effect seen. Maybe if Duane could supply the link to the URL this image came from (pre-processing), and also details of what processing was done to the image we could investigate further.

The composited A17 photo came from this site, with a detailed explanation of how two different researchers discovered the exact same image tampering.

http://www.theusofe.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=9995

I already posted the link with that composited photo.

You may be able to persuade John Dolva into believing the Apollo photos were not faked.. especially since he has already admitted to not knowing much about this subject, and apparently has already made up his mind who to believe.. But your tap dancing routine won't quite cut it this time Dave, since I have many other Apollo photos to present here which show the same type of image compositing that was used to fake the A17 photo.

I also have the BellCom evidence, showing exactly how "mountains" were composited into the backgrounds of the Apollo photos, and also how small scale cement models were used to fake certain "landing sites", including the A15 "Mt. Hadley" photos.

I don't have as much time to post here as some of the Apollo defenders do, but since moderator Evan Burton has so graciously allowed me to return to this forum without moderation, I will be providing the proof of this Apollo photo fakery in the weeks to come.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Evan,

I didn't say that Armstrong never talked publicly .. I said he didn't talk often, and was reluctant to talk about Apollo, as was evident in his 40th Anniversary of Apollo 11 speech, which only lasted 11 minutes.. With only 11 SECONDS of that 11 minutes, devoted to his alleged Apollo stunt.

I'm glad you posted that still shot from this TV interview though, as that was what I wanted to discuss next.

Not only is Neil Armstrong "shy" but he is also extremely uncomfortable, as can be seen by his stammering, squirming, gulping and scratching his neck when asked by this interviewer how many people walked on the Moon.

If you pay close attention to time stamp :44 , you will witness his "shy" behavior, along with his hesitation to answer exactly how many people suppossedly walked on the Moon.. In fact, the interviewer actually answered that question for him.

Sorry, but the entire interview shows the mannerisms of a guilty man with much to hide.

Edited by Duane Daman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The composited A17 photo came from this site, with a detailed explanation of how two different researchers discovered the exact same image tampering.

http://www.theusofe.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=9995

I already posted the link with that composited photo.

Duane

The site you linked to had a link to the Apollo image on the ALSJ, but that's not the one that shows the effect in the sky that they've highlighted (when processed). That's what I'm after, the actual image they used (i.e. the link to the image on whatever site they got it from, not just the ref number), and also what processing was used to highlight the effect shown.

You may be able to persuade John Dolva into believing the Apollo photos were not faked.. especially since he has already admitted to not knowing much about this subject, and apparently has already made up his mind who to believe.. But your tap dancing routine won't quite cut it this time Dave, since I have many other Apollo photos to present here which show the same type of image compositing that was used to fake the A17 photo.

I think John has quite amply shown that he's capable of doing his own research and coming to his own conclusions.

I also have the BellCom evidence, showing exactly how "mountains" were composited into the backgrounds of the Apollo photos, and also how small scale cement models were used to fake certain "landing sites", including the A15 "Mt. Hadley" photos.

I don't have as much time to post here as some of the Apollo defenders do, but since moderator Evan Burton has so graciously allowed me to return to this forum without moderation, I will be providing the proof of this Apollo photo fakery in the weeks to come.

I look forward to it, especially if it is claimed to be "proof" that the Apollo imagery cannot possibly be real, rather than "this is how I think they might have been able to fake it". Those 2 are not the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Evan,

I didn't say that Armstrong never talked publicly .. I said he didn't talk often, and was reluctant to talk about Apollo, as was evident in his 40th Anniversary of Apollo 11 speech, which only lasted 11 minutes.. With only 11 SECONDS of that 11 minutes, devoted to his alleged Apollo stunt.

I'm glad you posted that still shot from this TV interview though, as that was what I wanted to discuss next.

Not only is Neil Armstrong "shy" but he is also extremely uncomfortable, as can be seen by his stammering, squirming, gulping and scratching his neck when asked by this interviewer how many people walked on the Moon.

If you pay close attention to time stamp :44 , you will witness his "shy" behavior, along with his hesitation to answer exactly how many people suppossedly walked on the Moon.. In fact, the interviewer actually answered that question for him.

Sorry, but the entire interview shows the mannerisms of a guilty man with much to hide.

And was exactly his behaviour for years before Apollo was a dream, let alone a reality. He always eschewed the limelight for obscurity. Never blew his own trumpet, but got on with the job at hand. Even when things went badly wrong (ie : Training on the Lunar Landing Training Vehicles) he minimised the dangers to himself.

Some people consider a small ego to be a virtue. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not only is Neil Armstrong "shy" but he is also extremely uncomfortable, as can be seen by his stammering, squirming, gulping and scratching his neck when asked by this interviewer how many people walked on the Moon.

Neil Armstrong is by nature a very humble, reticent human being. That's just who he is. He doesn't revel in being the centre of attention, and that doesn't always sit well with being the first man to walk on the moon.

If you pay close attention to time stamp :44 , you will witness his "shy" behavior, along with his hesitation to answer exactly how many people suppossedly walked on the Moon.. In fact, the interviewer actually answered that question for him.

You're mis-representing what actually happens in the interview. The interviewer asked a rhetorical question, and answered it without giving Armstrong time to speak. He didn't ask the question, wait several seconds while there was an awkward silence, then tell Armstrong the answer. There was no hesitation on Armstrong's part, because he wasn't even given time to answer the question, which was rhetorical anyway!

If you think I'm wrong, please feel free to get a stopwatch, and measure the amount of time between the words "moon" and "twelve". It's a fraction of a second, virtually instantaneous.

Sorry, but the entire interview shows the mannerisms of a guilty man with much to hide.

As always you're entitled to your opinion. In my opinion, his humility is admirable, as is his desire for Apollo to be recognised as a team effort involving thousands, rather than focussing on the steps of one man who happened to be the one who first climbed out of the hatch. It's also clear from this interview (and others), that he doesn't want his life to be defined by a single action, but for the "ledger of our daily work".

Edited by Dave Greer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "Neil Armstrong is so shy" excuse has been used ad nauseum.

His "shyness" is because of his guilt, or possibly embarrassment, over his involvement with the Apollo scam.

His behavior might not be obvious to those who are too closed minded to see or admit that Apollo did not happen as advertised, but it's obvious to people who are not wearing Apollogist blinders.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KqfGZ4k9-fw&NR=1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Duane

The site you linked to had a link to the Apollo image on the ALSJ, but that's not the one that shows the effect in the sky that they've highlighted (when processed). That's what I'm after, the actual image they used (i.e. the link to the image on whatever site they got it from, not just the ref number), and also what processing was used to highlight the effect shown."

Dave,

If you're so curious as to what processing was used by those researchers, then I suggest you contact them to see where they obtained the photo and how they went about uncovering the image compositing that was used to fake that A17 photo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...