Moon Landing Photos: Problems with the Apollo Photos

A series of questions revolve around the pictures taken during the Apollo missions. The Astronauts used a special Hasselblad camera, and even the creator of the camera has voiced objections to the photos. All things considered, the photos represent some of the best evidence that support the claims of conspiracy theorists. This should seem natural, though, because the photos and film represent most of the evidence that men landed on the Moon.

If one peruses the many images taken from the Lunar surface, one is immediately struck by how fantastic the pictures look. Everything is pristine. The focus is immaculate, and the astronauts are always centered perfectly within the frame. The photos look as though they were taken by expert photographers, with each shot carefully fit into focus and frame perfectly. NASA tells us that the Hasselblad cameras were mounted upon the chests of the Astronauts, and that they had no way to line up objects in the frames of the camera. These cameras didn't have view finders or any sort of automatic focus. So how did they take such perfect pictures? Well, as it turns out, the Apollo astronauts were specially trained to use the cameras. They were shown a technique known as "zone focusing," which would explain the excellent pictures. Still, the pictures, to many theorists, seem too perfect, and NASA's aforementioned explanation might only be a clever afterthought.

One NASA employee explained that she saw people editing large versions of the Moon landing photos. The evidence of these edits has been examined at great length by moon hoax theorists. They have noticed that, in some cases, patches of the Lunar surface are exact copies of other areas. To put it in another way, the same rocks and dirt appear in sections across the picture, indicating a doctored photo. If these photos were taken at Area 51, as many theorists believe, the doctoring may have been done to remove trash, plants, and other anomalies from the photos. Some have found blurred sections in various photos, more commonly amongst the photos taken from Lunar orbit.

Conspiracy theorists like to point out the lack of stars in the Moon landing photos, but there are some holes in that theory. A camera focusing on things nearby will miss out on tiny details like stars in the background. Also, when the sun is in full view, stars are impossible to see with the naked eye here on Earth. During the daytime, can you see any stars in our blue sky? Well, the Moon does not have a blue sky because it does not have much atmosphere to speak of, but that doesn't mean that stars should be readily visible! Even with all of this explanation, we must ask - why didn't the astronauts attempt some sort of photo of the stars? Conspiracy theorists answer quite quickly: any non-conformity to actual celestial charts would be readily apparent; and thus, such a picture would make the Moon hoax plot laughably obvious.

The Moon is both a hot and cold place - temperatures fluctuate from around -270F to more than 300F (-170C to over 110C) - and these temperatures fluctuate wildly depending on whether the Astronaut is in the shade or not! That means that constant fluctuations in temperature take place on the moon. Conspiracy theorists explain that under these circumstances, the mechanical components of the cameras and the film itself would fail. This explanation only has so much clout, but it depends on whether you believe that men sent unmanned probes to the moon. The probes seem to have had no problem taking images from Lunar orbit, so, there should be no surprise that images could be taken from the Lunar surface. Still, it would be good of NASA or some organization to provide a simulation of these cameras in operation. Such a demonstration would put many conspiracy claims to rest. It has even been said, by some theorists, that the US may have gone to the Moon, but the astronauts were unable to take any photos because of the harsh environmental X-rays, temperatures, and whatnot.

The above image shows yet another common line of evidence from Moon hoaxers. These proponents of the Moon hoax usually examine the crosshairs that dot each Lunar photo quite closely. The crosshairs were present on the Lunar cameras between the lens and the film, and thus show up dotted across each photo. Hoaxers have noticed that some objects in the photos appear to be in front of these crosshairs - a seemingly impossible feat. The explanation for this may be simple, though: bleeding. These pictures are not digital. They were taken with film. Film captures light, and does not specifically capture a perfect or exact representation of the light exposed onto it. The bright white light from the rover, in the blown-up relief shown in the above picture, could simply be a bleeding of that bright light over the dark crosshair. Still, the theorists have a good point, and this problem could be cleared up with experiments. Just like with the temperature problem, NASA would only have to set up a few experiments (experiments that anyone could perform) that demonstrate film bleeding.

This next picture, above, shows Buzz Aldrin making his way down from the Lunar lander. Moan hoax theorists say that, since the lander is casting a shadow over him, he should be in darkness. After all, the only light present on the Moon was that of the Sun. Anti-hoax theorists claim that light was reflected off of the Lunar surface to illuminate him. This sort of problem could be resolved with experiments here on Earth, but they don't seem to have been attempted.

Moon hoax theorists also discuss the wayward shadows present in Lunar photos. They say that, since the Sun was the only light source, the shadows ought to be parallel to each other. Mythbusters had an episode where they showed that a surface can have one light, and yet contain shadows that don't appear to be parallel. Still, this sort of experiment can be done by anyone in their own home, and it would be best to try it for yourself before accepting such a conclusion.

Many of these theories have a high amount of plausibility. Some theories are better than others, and some could potentially be disproved (easily, with experiments). Still, the questions raised here remain intriguing. There are many more anomalies found within the Lunar photos, and they will be discussed at a later date.