Good stuff, Dwight.

Any idea if all those Westinghouse cameras required the same RBG frame/disk assembly mechanism? Was that disk system on board the camera itself or was that something that needed to be done in real time back on Earth? I would expect the HS-100 or similar to be the usual 1960s big honkin' machine and thus unlikely to be in the camera itself. But I have no way to know for certain.

RBG

Yes, all the colour cameras operated on the same sequential system. The signal was sent in "raw" format to earth where the disc array was used to combine the seperate colour fields into one frame of NTSC colour compatible signal (using the buffer set-up). ASTP carried a video recorder, although I dont know the specs of it just yet. I presume it was a straight sequential recorder. The equipment to convert to colour was just too big to carry on board, and of course the signal needed to be of as low bandwidth as possible. If you do a google search on Ampex HS 100, you'll see a pamphlet from the day which shows just how large the setup was.

At the very least, the camera itself must have had the color wheel and whatever circuitry or mechanics were required to synchronize it to the field rate. Was there something in the signal (say, in the interframe interval) that told the ground equipment which color each field was? Or did they just sync it to each field in turn until it looked right?

__________________
Relight the Firefly!

"It is quite clear that Occam's razor does not sharpen in your pyramid." (Nicolas)

"Still, a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest." (Paul Simon)

Or did they just sync it to each field in turn until it looked right?

In the Spacecraft Film's DVDs transferred from the JSC videotapes, you will sometimes spot the technician cycling through the color filters when a known color reference comes into the frame, typically a rover fender or the red stripe on the commander's suit. The moon, remarkably, looks about the same color regardless of the color filter synchronization.

Thanks! :-)

__________________
I want to go back to the moon.
I don't care which rocket you use, whichever one you pick, I'll like it, I swear.
"If you think the LHC will create black holes, you might as well believe Hobbits are at the bottom of your garden."- Dr. Mike Inglis
Rovers forever! - ToSeek

I finally got around to watching the Apollo 7 TV broadcasts. They are amazingly similar in quality to the Apollo 11 surface broadcasts. Since Apollo 7 was Earth Orbital and used the Saturn 1B booster, there would have been no need to fake it, so the TV broadcasts should be genuine even for a later hoax. It's then interesting to note the similar lack in quality of the the Apollo 11 and 7 broadcasts. I haven't seen the Apollo 8 ones yet, need to finish the Apollo 7 DAC footage first.

__________________
Howling from the Shadows

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. --- JayUtah

You can't reason an irrational person out of an irrational belief. --- Noclevername

Apollo: The History and the Hoax
Enter the World of Athran

G'day PhantomWolf,

The record of Apollo 7 through 11 is on the format as follows:
Apollo 7 16mm kinescope transferred from video source.
Apollo 8 Scan converted 2" B&W NTSC videotape
Apollo 9 16mm kinescope transferred from video source.
Apollo 10 Apollo 7 16mm kinescope transferred from sequential colour video source.
Apollo 11 16mm kinescope transferred from video source. CM used the sequential colour camera, the Lunar EVA used the Westinghouse B&W camera which operated on the same specs (320 lines, 10fps, B&W) as the RCA cameras used on A7 & A8. The Westinghouse camera was flight rated for lunar surface operations (as would have been the A9 camera, though it was never put through the EVA paces).

G'day Joe. The sync pulse was sent along with the video feed which allowed technicians on the ground to lock the appropriate disc array sequence to the incoming feed. The colour cycling seen on the SCF material is actually the 3 array coming up to speed and locking to the sync rather than any type of manual colour filter cycling. The off-looking colours you see are due to either 1 or 2 of the filtered colours not yet being matrixed to form a full colour signal.

The off-looking colours you see are due to either 1 or 2 of the filtered colours not yet being matrixed to form a full colour signal.

If that were the case, Dwight, wouldn't the color of the moon itself change as more colors joined the matrix? What we see is that the landscape's color remains generally gray while the red stripe on the suit, say, changes from green to blue to red.

What about the Apollo 12 astronauts returning the television camera of the Surveyor 3 back to Earth and on display in the National Air and Space Museum?

Different colours can be successfully discerned with only two combinations Check out this entry for a very quick explanation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-color_system . It is a similar circumstance with the matrixing on Apollo. There is a noticeable difference between the way everything looks with only two colours, and then all three. Also the human eye and imaging processing part of the brain adapt quite well to making the perceived colour balance look normal. (I have often been jolted when I see the 3rd colour sync up on Apollo where I thought all three were merged!!)

Just to make sure we are talking about the same thing, when you get a chance, take a look at Apollo 16, Disc 3, EVA 2, Station 5 from the start. For the first two minutes or so, you will see that the rover's fenders are green as well as the elbow stripe on Young's suit. When the camera pans all the way around so a fender is in view again, at 2:43, the fender changes from green to blue to red.

Up until that point, what color was missing from the matrix? I seem to see all three in the quick-motion-based color separations, such as the one at 1:26 where the Hasselblad swings through the field of view.

I am not trying to be argumentative here, but making sure I understand something I might not have understood before.

The Apollo 16 tapes have a notable fault which throws a spanner into the works as well. When remastering the tapes from the raw sequential tapes the colour sequence was erroneously Red Green Blue, instead of Red Blue Green, thus making the material appear off-hue. When I get a chance, I'll have a look at the DVDs. And confirm what is happening.

Hoax believers can be very stubborn. They likely ignore this, and explain it away as simply a prop used to fool people.

One should expect as much from these guys, as they STILL use the "no stars" arguement.
And yet, they ignore videos and images from other space missions, such as the ISS and the Voyagers, that do not (normally anyway) show stars.

__________________
This is no fantasy. No careless product of wild imagination. - Jor-El

Godspeed, John Glenn. - Scott Carpenter

And these atomic bombs that science burst upon the world that night were strange even to the men that used them.
- H.G Wells, The World Set Free

To the conspiracy crowd, radiation is a big Boogey Man that inspires terror and death in all who encounter it. - JayUtah

The National Air and Space Museum is too good for HBs to even set foot in.

__________________
I want to go back to the moon.
I don't care which rocket you use, whichever one you pick, I'll like it, I swear.
"If you think the LHC will create black holes, you might as well believe Hobbits are at the bottom of your garden."- Dr. Mike Inglis
Rovers forever! - ToSeek

They either think the museum is a hoax, or look at it like we look at the Ripley's museum.

__________________
Numbers are not case sensitive. (me)

My first words when I entered the ASM, not having visited since November '04: "OMG! SpaceShipOne!"

__________________
I want to go back to the moon.
I don't care which rocket you use, whichever one you pick, I'll like it, I swear.
"If you think the LHC will create black holes, you might as well believe Hobbits are at the bottom of your garden."- Dr. Mike Inglis
Rovers forever! - ToSeek

Have you been to the Udvar-Hazy Center?

__________________
"Slapping a guy on the head is just as funny now as it was eighty years ago."

Who, me? Sadly, no. But you should have seen the facts I was flinging off under SS1. One guy asked "Do you work here, Ms?"

__________________
I want to go back to the moon.
I don't care which rocket you use, whichever one you pick, I'll like it, I swear.
"If you think the LHC will create black holes, you might as well believe Hobbits are at the bottom of your garden."- Dr. Mike Inglis
Rovers forever! - ToSeek

Joe, I had a quick peek, and the colours were fine from the start of station 5. (At least on my set) am I looking at the wrong bit? I saw a bit of colour wavering but I'd place that as hue drift.

Joe, I had a quick peek, and the colours were fine from the start of station 5. (At least on my set) am I looking at the wrong bit?

Dwight, this prompted me to dig out my Haskin tapes (taken from kinescopes?). The color is indeed normal at the start of station 5.

The Spacecraft Films DVD shows a green stripe and rover fenders, which are red in the Haskin version. It looks the same played on my PC. Here is a frame capture from 1:28 in the sequence:

http://home.earthlink.net/~joejd/ima...green-band.jpg

If your source is the Spacecraft Films DVD, perhaps you have a later version than me. I believe they did update the set to include audio during the drive between the stations.

Do the video tapes sitting in the archives contain color, or are they the raw field sequential color that Mark Gray had to convert to color?

Anything new here that hasn't been answered already?http://www.godlikeproductions.com/bb...0/2/07&forum=1

Dude, that site has been ripped to shreds several times on this forum. Just do a search for "nasascam" or "sam colby" and you'll find the answers you're looking for.

Here's the latest thread about it.

Anything new here that hasn't been answered already?

There's usually something new, since Sam Colby makes a major update a couple times a year. Unfortunately Sam has little more than a shouting-distance acquaintance with reality, so most of his claims are self-debunking and often quite funny.

His major theme is finding incidental training or test photographs, then manufacturing a completely fabricated story illustrated with them. People somehow get the idea that the story is true because it appears on the same web page with pictures.

He has been responsible in the past for some absolute howlers, such as wondering why the LM didn't have the triangular windows that the photos depict.

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

I think that's being a little genereous Jay, Reality long since ecasped ear-shot of Sam's lunatic ranting.

__________________
Howling from the Shadows

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. --- JayUtah

You can't reason an irrational person out of an irrational belief. --- Noclevername

Apollo: The History and the Hoax
Enter the World of Athran

(first post and confused how this site works... duh)

But glad to have found you all because the gobbledygook sites spewing rhetoric and opinions with too much energy focusing on photo analysis (no pun intended) used to create a hoax and then debunk it (to me) is a complete waste of time.

I have enjoyed reading every post here and impressed at the really intelligent points raised, far more intelligent than me... however, would like to see more scientific data and facts to support the truth that man on the moon is not a hoax and would like to share two absolute definitive answers:

1. seq bay pendulum swing analysis:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kojsf...eature=related

2. Lunar Lazar Ranger left on the moon to reflect a Lazar sent from earth 249 times a year since 1969...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aqlo_spATEM&eurl=
skip to 6:20

Unscannable posted a compelling point (that is new to me) about how Apollo 12 brought back a movie camera left on the moon... nice! Here is a list of man made debris left on the moon
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ts_on_the_Moon

Which brings me to the MILLION DOLLAR QUESTION:

Has anyone seen a recent photo from a subsequent unmanned moon visit or satellite that shows the moon buggy was in fact left behind. To me, this would be some good evidence.

I can't find one and would appreciate anyone that can... thanks.

Not yet, but maybe the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter will get some good photographs. It's scheduled to be launched in April 2009.
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2005/11jul_lroc.htm

__________________
"One does not require alien ruins in order to absorb a profound sense of wonder and mystery from the moon. That our civilization had actually visited it is miracle enough." Jason Roberts

Allow me to add an excellent video provided by Sir Mildred Pierce that covers some evidence that is not often discussed.
This video discusses Carruthers Lunar Observatory.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z1aixi_Sj24&fmt=6

Bing Bang Bada Boom! Now that's what I am talking about... science baby! In deed, that is a good one! I mean I don't care who you are, that's a good one right thar (paraphrasing Larry The Cable Guy). That's waay too much science for this bonehead to comprehend... and can you imagine the rest of them (boneheads) still trying to hang on to the hoax theory.

(so tell me, Neverfly... do you know what really happened to JFK? lol...)

Truly, thanks for sharing that and hope you don't mind if I add that celestial arrow to my quiver of universe!

But, BUT... still searching for a Hubble telescope of sorts type of photo with that moon buggy thing in it's cross hairs. With all this technology today, you think one would exist, right?

Not until someone builds a telescope with a mirror about 200 meters across, or about ten times the size of the largest one in currently in existence. The Hubble's mirror is only 2.4 meters in diameter, it can't see anything smaller than a football stadium on the Moon. The resolving limit of optics is a hard physical limit, it can't be overcome by "all this technology today" and has been known since long before Apollo.

__________________
"Any Sufficiently Analyzed Magic is Indistinguishable from SCIENCE!" -Agatha Heterodyne

"Any technology, no matter how primitive, is magic to those who don't understand it." -Florence Ambrose