when it comes to the Aulis time/photograph study, they seem to conveniently forget that there were 2 astronauts taking pictures (except on Apollo 11), not just 1...that alone doubles the allowable time for photography.
And you still think that the vast majority of photos were "excellent" quality. You need to study, and look at at least a lot of the pictures. You'll see the claim is just plain wrong.
They were on the Moon in the lunar morning, when the surface was well below it's maximum. But the surface tempertature has virtually no affect on film inside the camera in a vaccuum environment.

Perhaps he is thinking in comparison with his own photography prowess.

tbm

__________________
Paddle faster!! I hear banjo music!!

So what is the temperature on the surface of the moon at 3:00 in the afternoon...

3:00 where?

...the pictures would all have to be taken in a short time during which the temperature would be suitable.

Temperature figures for the lunar surface are generally quoted only for the lunar surface itself. Why would that affect photography?

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

Ok mr. deflect all the questions and try to demean the conspiracy theorist, what was the temperature when the photos were taken in that 150 minutes?

Easy to release pictures shortly after a mission if they are already printed before the mission?

And how is it that those camera bodies didn't get hot? The manufacturer stated that they were just regular bodies. Are you saying that the surface was not hot?

I'm confused

Oh I see now, the temperature on the "surface" is different than it is 3 feet above it right?

So those spacesuits had to be pretty impressive technology to be able to do all that variable cooling and heating, correct?

The surface of the moon being "hot" has no significant bearing on the temperature of the camera. There is no air or other medium to transfer heat from the moon's surface to the camera.

tom

__________________
Paddle faster!! I hear banjo music!!

...that it couldn't be done with those nimble suits and gloves that were worn on the moon.

I didn't seem to have any trouble.

My apologies for even suggesting such drivel.

As long as we both agree it's drivel. Unlike you, I've actually tried (and succeeded) to do the things you say were impossible and would have impeded photography to the point of making it suspicious.

I knew you'd have the pat answer. Thanks.

Pat questions tend to have pat answers. Missing viewfinders and cumbersome gloves are allegations you simply read from David Percy's web site and apparently didn't question. I read them too, wondered if they might be true, and set about testing them. Because I exercised original thought, I know something you don't and David Percy doesn't. And yes, that makes my opinion better support than yours.

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

Oh, bother!!

SCIENCE 101!!!!!

tbm

__________________
Paddle faster!! I hear banjo music!!

Well, this one is very witty, you don't like people that have different oppinions than yourself?

Does that mean that you have dislikes for other characteristics as well?

Or is it just an attack to back up his Majesty who has been doing the same since he arrived on the scene?

Very witty indeed

Ah yes the reference at the bottom of your post to farts says it all

The temperature of what 3 feet above the surface?

__________________
I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

Disclaimer: Avatar is not an official NASA image and does not imply any specific interplanetary or interstellar capability.

The Leif Ericson Cruiser

Oh I see now, the temperature on the "surface" is different than it is 3 feet above it right?

Yes. Because 3 feet above the surface there's nothing to have a temperature. Clearly you know very little about heat transfer, and that would be an important thing to understand before you made wild handwaving claims about what would get too hot and what would get too cold.

So those spacesuits had to be pretty impressive technology to be able to do all that variable cooling and heating, correct?

No, just the ordinary technology. It's well known to engineers. I'm sorry you don't seem to know about it.

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

Really? So give me an answer mr. science 101. What was the surface temperature when they were supposedly walking on the moon? And what was it at camera level?

Should be a walk in the park with your scientific prowess

Nah, I'm just a little goofy 'cause I tired. Plus, I'm not in a mood to try to explain basic science to somebody who doesn't understand it and has no desire to learn it.

BTW, Jay (his Majesty) doesn't wear his poufy wig in public on Tuesdays.

tbm

__________________
Paddle faster!! I hear banjo music!!

Have you ever put cold or hot liquid in a thermos? EVer wonder why they stay that way for a long time?

tbm

__________________
Paddle faster!! I hear banjo music!!

Duck and Dive, seems to be all you scientists and engineers know about here.

This is obviously not going to garner me any real knowledge, just attacks and diversion, kinda like your heroes at nasa act wouldn't you say?

Such a pile of drivel, not one of you geniuses has a clue how to answer any questions. Its all about towing the party line and putting up a fancy website proclaiming that we know it all. What a waste of time.

Thanks for the reasurrance that I was correct about my conspiracy theory, lol

Another cop out, if its so basic, then it should be on the tip of your tongue.

...what was the temperature when the photos were taken in that 150 minutes?

The temperature of what?

Easy to release pictures shortly after a mission if they are already printed before the mission?

I suppose it would be too much to ask for proof that they were printed before the mission.

And how is it that those camera bodies didn't get hot?

Because they underwent extensive thermal design and testing. An object heated mostly by radiant heat transfer controls its temperature by controlling how much light it absorbs at various wavelengths and how readily it can emit to its surroundings.

The manufacturer stated that they were just regular bodies.

No, they were not, nor does the manufacturer claim that. They were coated with a thermal coating, very similar to the one applied to Thermos bottles. That coating has emissive and absorptive properties that help regulate the heat absorption and re-emission.

Are you saying that the surface was not hot?

No. I'm saying that the temperature of the lunar surface has nothing to do with the temperature of the film in the camera or the temperature of the camera body.

Further, the film base was Estar made from polyesther. What is the melting point of polyesther?

I'm confused

Clearly. And therefore in such a condition it is unwise of you to insult those who are trying to educate you.

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

Since when is answering you question as plainly as possible "Duck and Dive"?

The temp of the moon's surface is irrelevent because there is no air to transfer the surface's heat to the camera. Got it?

tbm

__________________
Paddle faster!! I hear banjo music!!

This is getting tedious, its obvious you know nothing except a few irrelevant tidbits about crap that doesn't matter. My theory stands firm. Your conspiracy theory is so full of holes.