And don't get sideswiped by "there are no stars!" You have your choice with any camera: set the aperture small enough that you don't get washed out by the brightly lit part of your scene, or set the aperture large enough that you will detect the faintly lit part of your scene. You can't get both at the same time. (Ever been at a nighttime baseball game, brightly lit by the field lights? Overhead is the night sky. In the midst of all that brightness can you look up and see stars? Not me.) Anyway, the whole point of the photography was to capture the scenes on the surface, and the stars were too faint under that choice.
Also notice how close the horizon appears. The Moon is smaller than the Earth by quite a bit.
And there is lunar grit. Unique, found nowhere else, and actually quite a problem for the astronauts (clings, gets into seals, stinks).
I'll bear that in mind next time I review the footage. Thanks fren
And don't get sideswiped by "there are no stars!" You have your choice with any camera: set the aperture small enough that you don't get washed out by the brightly lit part of your scene, or set the aperture large enough that you will detect the faintly lit part of your scene. You can't get both at the same time. (Ever been at a nighttime baseball game, brightly lit by the field lights? Overhead is the night sky. In the midst of all that brightness can you look up and see stars? Not me.) Anyway, the whole point of the photography was to capture the scenes on the surface, and the stars were too faint under that choice.
Also notice how close the horizon appears. The Moon is smaller than the Earth by quite a bit.
And there is lunar grit. Unique, found nowhere else, and actually quite a problem for the astronauts (clings, gets into seals, stinks).