Buzz Aldrin: Shitdick?

[not that Jack Horner]

wigger

I'm watching a video about NATO rearmament and expansion in total disregard from the deals made by HW, Gorbachev and James Baker in order to get Russia to remove its military bases and 500k troops from East Germany in the reunification summits..

Don't know what you're talking about. Stop contacting this user, continuing to do so constitutes felony faggotry.

 

[HipTuckerCumia]

Ok, too brainy for you? Fine, just watch this. It's from the Smithsonian:

It took me about 5 minutes to find a transcript of the camera operator explaining how it was done in plain english:

Spoiler

At first it was a little tricky, but in trying to figure out how to keep up with the crew and to lead what they were doing, you had to kind of anticipate what was going on. If you watched some of the television, you will notice that when the crewmen started to move, the camera didn't start to move, it started to open up. If you look at the pictures, you'll notice that the first thing it would hit would be a zoom function, and you'll notice it on the TV. If you look at it, you'll notice that as soon as he started to move, I would hit zoom out. What that would do would give me a chance to stay with him, because the picture was opening up, and then I could see if he was moving left or right, and then start moving the camera. Then if he would stop, I could zoom back in. If you take a look at the pictures, knowing that that's what was going on, the secret was in using the zoom. The zoom allowed you to breathe. In other words, by opening up, you could see it. Because what you saw was three seconds old, see. So that's the way you were able to kind of stay with it.

The other thing you had to watch out for was the light, like I told you. The light was crucial. Because you'd get this big bloom. In some of those pictures you'll see this big strobe of light coming in there, and that's what that is, because the sun is incredibly bright with no atmosphere and everything.

After a while, it became real easy, but you really had to pay attention. You couldn't stop and think, and you couldn't stop and go to the bathroom, and you couldn't do too much talking with anybody else, but you had to monitor the other comm systems, too, but you had a back room. But you really had to pay attention. If you went through six hours of that, you were really tired. It really wore you down, because it was constant. The only time you got to take a breath is when they started to move, and they took over the rover, and that was like your break time, like, "I'm going to the bathroom, quick. I'll be back." And that's what you got. But it was real intense.

The other thing that I'll explain to you how it worked, and it's a little interesting, is you've seen this picture where the lunar module lifts off and the camera follows it. Well, on 15, the motor burned out and we couldn't do that. On 16, the rover was not parked in the right place, so consequently we missed it.

Now, the way that worked was this. Harley Weyer, who worked for me, sat down and figured what the trajectory would be and where the lunar rover would be each second as it moved out and what your settings would go to. That picture you see was taken without looking at it at all. There was no watching it and doing anything with that picture. As the crew counted down, that's a [Apollo] 17 picture you see, as [Eugene A.] Cernan counted down and he knew he had to park in the right place because I was going to kill him, he didn't—and Gene and I are good friends, he'll tell you that—I actually sent the first command at liftoff minus three seconds. And each command was scripted, and all I was doing was looking at a clock, sending commands. I was not looking at the television. I really didn't see it until it was over with and played back. Those were pre-set commands that were just punched out via time. That's the way it was followed. That's the way it followed it.

On that same mission we tried to track it back in. I don't know whether you know that or not. You know, the lunar module crashed back in. There was a scientist who wanted to see it coming back in, and then they were going to look on the seismometer, whatever you call it, and get that data and so on. But everything that was figured out or whatever, we never saw it. But that's the way that was done, but it wasn't done by looking at the camera, at the picture at all. It was all done via time.

Edward I. Fendell Oral History

How did the astronauts frame the image perfectly?

The lunar rover had a remote controllable (from earth) camera. The astronauts simply had to park the rover in a good enough spot.

On 16, the rover was not parked in the right place, so consequently we missed it.

Who panned the camera? People will say it was done by remote, ok, so how'd that work? You play videogames on the Internet and if there is just one hiccup it fucks everything up. So you mean to tell me that video sent from the moon and to Houston and a guy with a joystick was able to pan the camera up perfectly in 1972 or whenever this was?

The camera operators figured out the angles and timing:

Now, the way that worked was this. Harley Weyer, who worked for me, sat down and figured what the trajectory would be and where the lunar rover would be each second as it moved out and what your settings would go to.

At showtime they just followed the script blind:

I actually sent the first command at liftoff minus three seconds. And each command was scripted, and all I was doing was looking at a clock, sending commands. I was not looking at the television. I really didn't see it until it was over with and played back. Those were pre-set commands that were just punched out via time.

It had to be done this way because, using the video game analogy, their monitor had a 3 second input latency. They almost lose the shot about 10 seconds in.

Get the fuck out.

 

[Imager]

It took me about 5 minutes to find a transcript of the camera operator explaining how it was done in plain english:

Spoiler

At first it was a little tricky, but in trying to figure out how to keep up with the crew and to lead what they were doing, you had to kind of anticipate what was going on. If you watched some of the television, you will notice that when the crewmen started to move, the camera didn't start to move, it started to open up. If you look at the pictures, you'll notice that the first thing it would hit would be a zoom function, and you'll notice it on the TV. If you look at it, you'll notice that as soon as he started to move, I would hit zoom out. What that would do would give me a chance to stay with him, because the picture was opening up, and then I could see if he was moving left or right, and then start moving the camera. Then if he would stop, I could zoom back in. If you take a look at the pictures, knowing that that's what was going on, the secret was in using the zoom. The zoom allowed you to breathe. In other words, by opening up, you could see it. Because what you saw was three seconds old, see. So that's the way you were able to kind of stay with it.

The other thing you had to watch out for was the light, like I told you. The light was crucial. Because you'd get this big bloom. In some of those pictures you'll see this big strobe of light coming in there, and that's what that is, because the sun is incredibly bright with no atmosphere and everything.

After a while, it became real easy, but you really had to pay attention. You couldn't stop and think, and you couldn't stop and go to the bathroom, and you couldn't do too much talking with anybody else, but you had to monitor the other comm systems, too, but you had a back room. But you really had to pay attention. If you went through six hours of that, you were really tired. It really wore you down, because it was constant. The only time you got to take a breath is when they started to move, and they took over the rover, and that was like your break time, like, "I'm going to the bathroom, quick. I'll be back." And that's what you got. But it was real intense.

The other thing that I'll explain to you how it worked, and it's a little interesting, is you've seen this picture where the lunar module lifts off and the camera follows it. Well, on 15, the motor burned out and we couldn't do that. On 16, the rover was not parked in the right place, so consequently we missed it.

Now, the way that worked was this. Harley Weyer, who worked for me, sat down and figured what the trajectory would be and where the lunar rover would be each second as it moved out and what your settings would go to. That picture you see was taken without looking at it at all. There was no watching it and doing anything with that picture. As the crew counted down, that's a [Apollo] 17 picture you see, as [Eugene A.] Cernan counted down and he knew he had to park in the right place because I was going to kill him, he didn't—and Gene and I are good friends, he'll tell you that—I actually sent the first command at liftoff minus three seconds. And each command was scripted, and all I was doing was looking at a clock, sending commands. I was not looking at the television. I really didn't see it until it was over with and played back. Those were pre-set commands that were just punched out via time. That's the way it was followed. That's the way it followed it.

On that same mission we tried to track it back in. I don't know whether you know that or not. You know, the lunar module crashed back in. There was a scientist who wanted to see it coming back in, and then they were going to look on the seismometer, whatever you call it, and get that data and so on. But everything that was figured out or whatever, we never saw it. But that's the way that was done, but it wasn't done by looking at the camera, at the picture at all. It was all done via time.

Edward I. Fendell Oral History

The lunar rover had a remote controllable (from earth) camera. The astronauts simply had to park the rover in a good enough spot.

On 16, the rover was not parked in the right place, so consequently we missed it.

They camera operators figured out the angles and timing:

Now, the way that worked was this. Harley Weyer, who worked for me, sat down and figured what the trajectory would be and where the lunar rover would be each second as it moved out and what your settings would go to.

At showtime they just followed the script blind:

I actually sent the first command at liftoff minus three seconds. And each command was scripted, and all I was doing was looking at a clock, sending commands. I was not looking at the television. I really didn't see it until it was over with and played back. Those were pre-set commands that were just punched out via time.

It had to be done this way because, using the video game analogy, their monitor had a 3 second input latency.

Or it was done by a cameraman in a studio and we never went to the moon. Simplest explanation is usually correct.

I know that's not a real counter argument. Fine. Let's go.

Now, the way that worked was this. Harley Weyer, who worked for me, sat down and figured what the trajectory would be and where the lunar rover would be each second as it moved out and what your settings would go to.

Oh, ok. So the astronauts just picked a spot on the moon and set the camera down, and from that mission control on earth new the exact compass angle the camera was put to account for the rotation of the moon so that buttons could be pushed in a sequence as some point and there was never any lag, ever and it worked first try! So you're telling me that astronauts not only had to become expert at camera setup but they would also have to send angle and distance info back to Houston so that the shot could be perfectly framed because getting the shot perfect is so important that we need to pay people on earth to do on-the-fly calculations of camera settings for every second of liftoff because there was only one try and we got it within 3 missions of trying.

It's crazy how perfect it was in 1972 yet when I drive in my car and talk on the phone when I go through certain areas the call goes out or even drops completely and I live in a decent size town. Much easier problem to solve than this moon communication.

I'm also amazed that TV production quality cameras had battery packs back then, even battery packs that could withstand the moon's intense temperatures.

Next you're going to tell me that the 60s sci-fi sparkle effect is "chromatic abberation".

 

[johnnynoname]

@johnnynoname , would you mind doing the honors?

Of course.......I hate this thread

 

[Smeckler's Powder]

but Occam's Razor and all

TLDR, tapped out

 

[Imager]

Last comment...for real. No it is not proof, but Occam's Razor and all, the risk was so great faking it, why bother? What was the play? Did it do anything? If it saved us from a nuclear war with the USSR or something than so what if it was faked. I'm not saying you, but there are a lot of low intellect people around here that can't stay linear in an event chain. It's why they have trouble doing anything but commenting on posts. They lack the faculties to think on their feet and the social conditioning to understand human ingenuity. We went to the moon until proved otherwise should be your default, not the reverse.

Occam's Razor would say we didn't go to the moon and it was faked, because getting humans to the moon and back is really fucking hard.

Imagine if Columbus discovered America, came back and told everyone he got there, and then 60 years later no one else sent humans to America. You would think something is up.

The former head of the Russian version of NASA said he doesn't believe Americans went to the moon, and he's got access to a lot more data than we do. Perhaps he's bluffing due to Ukraine. Perhaps it's another psyop, I don't know what to believe any more so my default is I believe nothing until shown irrefutable proof, especially if it's a mainstream position.

Stoking Conspiracies: Russian space agency boss says that 'no proof' US ever landed on the Moon

Russia's Roscosmos space agency's former boss Dmitry Rogozin, believes that the US Apollo 11 mission was faked and that American astronauts never landed on the Moon. He further questions why, all of a sudden, did the US stop sending manned missions to the Moon.

www.firstpost.com

 

[not that Jack Horner]

Or it was done by a cameraman in a studio and we never went to the moon. Simplest explanation is usually correct.

I know that's not a real counter argument. Fine. Let's go.


Oh, ok. So the astronauts just picked a spot on the moon and set the camera down, and from that mission control on earth new the exact compass angle the camera was put to account for the rotation of the moon so that buttons could be pushed in a sequence as some point and there was never any lag, ever and it worked first try! So you're telling me that astronauts not only had to become expert at camera setup but they would also have to send angle and distance info back to Houston so that the shot could be perfectly framed because getting the shot perfect is so important that we need to pay people on earth to do on-the-fly calculations of camera settings for every second of liftoff because there was only one try and we got it within 3 missions of trying.

It's crazy how perfect it was in 1972 yet when I drive in my car and talk on the phone when I go through certain areas the call goes out or even drops completely and I live in a decent size town. Much easier problem to solve than this moon communication.

I'm also amazed that TV production quality cameras had battery packs back then, even battery packs that could withstand the moon's intense temperatures.

Next you're going to tell me that the 60s sci-fi sparkle effect is "chromatic abberation".

astronauts are great executive producers child

 

[johnnynoname]

woozle Wuzzle?

 

[chocolatehellhole]

Imagine if Columbus discovered America, came back and told everyone he got there, and then 60 years later no one else sent humans to America. You would think something is up.

There isn't much more to learn from the moon. We did it manned 6 times and by the end of it they were just playing golf... We know we can do that. Getting to Mars is the next step and will probably be achieved in our lifetimes (if you're not Boomia).

 

[not that Jack Horner]

We did it 6 times and by the end of it they were just playing golf... We know we can do that.

We?

 

[chocolatehellhole]

We?

I'm sorry, I thought you were American.

 

[not that Jack Horner]

I'm sorry, I thought you were American.

you posting shit porn on the internet had no effect on the space race

 

[HipTuckerCumia]

Or it was done by a cameraman in a studio and we never went to the moon. Simplest explanation is usually correct.

I know that's not a real counter argument. Fine. Let's go.


Oh, ok. So the astronauts just picked a spot on the moon and set the camera down, and from that mission control on earth new the exact compass angle the camera was put to account for the rotation of the moon so that buttons could be pushed in a sequence as some point and there was never any lag, ever and it worked first try! So you're telling me that astronauts not only had to become expert at camera setup but they would also have to send angle and distance info back to Houston so that the shot could be perfectly framed because getting the shot perfect is so important that we need to pay people on earth to do on-the-fly calculations of camera settings for every second of liftoff because there was only one try and we got it within 3 missions of trying.

It's crazy how perfect it was in 1972 yet when I drive in my car and talk on the phone when I go through certain areas the call goes out or even drops completely and I live in a decent size town. Much easier problem to solve than this moon communication.

Again, they didn't set down any cameras. The camera was permanently mounted on the lunar rover and was remote controlled from earth. They shot a ton of footage with those rover cameras. Here's from Apollo 16:



You can see the awkward zooming and panning. The picture received on earth (what the camera operators were seeing) from the rover camera had about 3 second delay. The camera operators knew where the rover was parked, aimed the camera at the lunar module and had plenty of time to figure out the angles and timing. Then they executed the shot. It wasn't perfect. They couldn't keep it centered and almost lost the shot first time about 10 seconds in.

I'm also amazed that TV production quality cameras had battery packs back then, even battery packs that could withstand the moon's intense temperatures.

The lunar rover was an electric car. The moon isn't hot or cold as we understand it. There's no atmosphere. The sun is hot, but it doesn't make much practical difference if you are on the moon or low earth orbit, for example. Critical components would have insulating and radiators, perhaps even active heaters. I don't believe it was that big of a problem.

edit: Also the moon rotates once every...month. They absolutely didn't have to take that into calculation for their 30 second pan.

 

[chocolatehellhole]

you posting shit porn on the internet had no effect on the space race

Boq's disgusting rape speech is a real problem. This is the side you choose?

 

[aRTie02150]

Look guys.

I went to the moon in 1996 after Charles and Diana broke up. I was sick of hearing all the news and figured I'd go somewhere that wouldn't be talking about BRITISH gossip.

So the moon isn't all that great. I was only there for a week and decided to leave seeing as the economy just doesn't exist just yet.

They still had items on their Burger King menu that I thought had stopped being offered in the 80s which was very weird.

 

[johnnynoname]

Look guys.

I went to the moon in 1996 after Charles and Diana broke up. I was sick of hearing all the news and figured I'd go somewhere that wouldn't be talking about BRITISH gossip.

So the moon isn't all that great. I was only there for a week and decided to leave seeing as the economy just doesn't exist just yet.

They still had items on their Burger King menu that I thought had stopped being offered in the 80s which was very weird.

this was a stupid post

 

[Meownaw]

You can put a satellite on your house to receive a TV signal. But are they floating in the sky above your home? No. Only retards believe this.

He probably thinks the little doggy company is actually a little dog.

 

[Meownaw]

this was a stupid post

Yeah it definitely was.

 

[Smeckler's Powder]

the nuke bombings after effect footage was faked with minatures

You mean the ones on Japan?

 

[Smeckler's Powder]

if you know anything about space ships

they measure everything that goes into space on them

why would they sacrifice food or fuel for a gorilla suit?

WUT