why no stars

This is why.

I took a short series of photos of the moon to show the effect of changing the exposure time.
Which was the only change made between them.
The first exposure was for one five thousandth of a second, only at about the one second mark did stars become visible.

No tripod was used which also shows how pointless astronomy with a hand held camera is.
As a note keeping a camera steady for 4 seconds is painful, even with an arm rest.

And just to show that there were plenty of stars; the final frame shows a 15 second exposure.

I tried this with a full moon initially, but it was so bright the glare washed any stars out at all.

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• moon
• hoax
• no
• stars
• space
• apollo
• nasa

[rongwrong1]

not only are there no stars in the photos which I can understand being a photographer, the astronauts are on record saying that there were no stars visible. This is rather hard to believe.

[ytmoog]

@rongwrong1

That is a bit simplistic.

They have stated seeing stars while on the shadowed side of the moon, and through the small optical telescope on board.

But in both of those cases the light from the sun was blocked.

And eyes do need to dark adapt in order to see the far fainter stars and that is very hard to do with glare from the sun.

[SirMildredPierce]

I think this is an excellent demonstration. It is quite simple, really. But it will be over the heads of many people.

[guitarplayer4real]

Excellent job!! And might I say its about time someone answered these hoaxtards with the REAL facts, not the made up ones!

[cmmrc]

@rongwrong1 you said it! they said it! some people choose not to hear it.

[cmmrc]

@ytmoog understood

[ytmoog]

@cmmrc

They did actually take a small ultra-violet observatory with Apollo 16 and took a lot of images of the stars and the earth.

Taking them with a hand held camera would be pointless, as the exposure would have to be very long it is not possible to hold the camera still enough. And you get lots of little trails.

One question, why would it be one of the things you think they would do exactly?

See the video above for a few examples of that.

[cmmrc]

@centurion180ad no matter what, pictures with the stars can be taken on the moon. my guess is that taking a picture of the stars is one of the things the people landing on the moon would do

[ytmoog]

@centurion180ad

"TV camera does not need to worry about exposure."

:D

Never used one I take it?

And no, I am stating that a long exposure time show dimmer objects such as stars and town lights from space.

Where as very bright objects (such as the sunlit earth) need a very short exposure time to not over expose them vastly.

And I also show that very well in this video, with the sunlit moon and stars.

[ytmoog]

@centurion180ad

And Apollo images of the stars and planets show they photographed Stars, Venus and earth.

So what?

Actually TV cameras are far less sensitive than hand held cameras, try it one night and you will find they have a great deal of difficulty seeing stars.

"NASA video & stills already capture surface lights of small towns and stars all in the same picture"

The lights of small towns are vastly dimmer than the directly sunlit earth.

[centurion180ad]

@ytmoog TV camera does not need to worry about exposure.

I can see surface lights of small towns and the NASA still also captures that dim surface light.

I can see all stars down to very dim which the NASA still also captures in the same photograph of the surface lights.

You seem to be suggesting that the relative luminosity & narrow frequency range of surface lights and then stars are unrelated phenomena with respect to the film.

[centurion180ad]

@ytmoog Russian Soyuz video it is possible to see many large bright stars or planets.

A TV camera is more sensative and TV recorders have a higher range & definition than hand held, which is what Soyuz uses.

NASA video & stills already capture surface lights of small towns and stars all in the same picture, demonstrating that if I can see it with my eyes and the film picks it up that everything my eyes see also ends up on the film.