How many pictures were taken on the lunar surface?

[Rob48]

That is a hellovalot of photos for the fakers to photoshop without Photoshop!

That's a hell of a lot of photos for the fakers to fake WITH Photoshop! But seriously, I've seen it claimed the Apollo visuals were faked with  3D CGI.  Yeaaah.

Hoax believers: "No way could they have flown to the moon with those primitive computers!"
Also hoax believers: "NASA faked the whole thing with computers!"

[Glom]

That is a hellovalot of photos for the fakers to photoshop without Photoshop!

That's a hell of a lot of photos for the fakers to fake WITH Photoshop! But seriously, I've seen it claimed the Apollo visuals were faked with  3D CGI.  Yeaaah.

Hoax believers: "No way could they have flown to the moon with those primitive computers!"
Also hoax believers: "NASA faked the whole thing with computers!"

A specific case of the more general HB contradiction whereby they dismiss the difficulty of successfully staging a hoax by saying something along the lines of, "NASA can do anything... except fly to the Moon."

[Apollo 957]

I had a looksee at Apollo 11 and 12 in the wake of claims on YouTube that the astronauts couldn't physically have taken "so many photos"; hoax theorists tend to ignore the speedy "click-turn-click-turn" of a panorama, and the number of shots that were taken simply to wind on a few frames at beginning or end of a magazine. These are only the EVA photos, and discount those taken from inside the LM.

Apollo 11 EVA photos;

120 in 151m - 1 every 75 secs, including panoramas of 12+11+13+12+8 = 56 shots, plus 7 frames wound at end of film before changing magazine (making 63)

So, broadly speaking, (120 minus 63 = ) 60 or so individual (non-panorama, non end-of-film) photos over 2h31m, an average of 1 every 1m 15s.

======================================
Apollo 12 EVA photos
4 magazines over 2 EVAs
557 in 7h50m (470m) including panoramas of 15+17+18+15+8+7+19+20+24+30 = 173

So ... generally, 325 individual photos in 470m - average 1 per 1m45s

[bknight]

I had a looksee at Apollo 11 and 12 in the wake of claims on YouTube that the astronauts couldn't physically have taken "so many photos"; hoax theorists tend to ignore the speedy "click-turn-click-turn" of a panorama, and the number of shots that were taken simply to wind on a few frames at beginning or end of a magazine. These are only the EVA photos, and discount those taken from inside the LM.

Apollo 11 EVA photos;

120 in 151m - 1 every 75 secs, including panoramas of 12+11+13+12+8 = 56 shots, plus 7 frames wound at end of film before changing magazine (making 63)

So, broadly speaking, (120 minus 63 = ) 60 or so individual (non-panorama, non end-of-film) photos over 2h31m, an average of 1 every 1m 15s.

======================================
Apollo 12 EVA photos
4 magazines over 2 EVAs
557 in 7h50m (470m) including panoramas of 15+17+18+15+8+7+19+20+24+30 = 173

So ... generally, 325 individual photos in 470m - average 1 per 1m45s

Have you researched the time for the trip around Surveyor Crater enroute to Surveyor III?

[onebigmonkey]

I have often pointed out to them that I routinely take more photographs on holiday.

As well as the panorama shots they also tend to ignore stereo pairs and other multiple shots of the same thing.

Many of the photographs taken during the J missions were continuous sequences taken in transit on the rover, eg magazines 108-110 on Apollo 16.

[Apollo 957]

Have you researched the time for the trip around Surveyor Crater enroute to Surveyor III?

No. Do tell.

[bknight]

Have you researched the time for the trip around Surveyor Crater enroute to Surveyor III?

No. Do tell.

Well I was thinking while walking they might have been less likely to take any images, so that time might cut down the total amount allowable for images in your average.  Of course they would have stopped at interesting spots to take images and do sampling.

[Obviousman]

Of course, don't forget a couple of things:

- A number of images were scheduled into the EVA timeline

- It was drilled into them that film was cheap but sending people to the Moon was expensive, so unexposed film returned to the Earth was wasted opportunity & money. Even a poor shot gave some information (well, perhaps except for those occasional accidental shots where all we see is a blurry image of an arm or something).

[bknight]

From https://www.honeysucklecreek.net/msfn_missions/Apollo_12_mission/hl_apollo12.html

The second EVA started at 13:54 Australian Eastern Standard time, visiting ALSEP and Head Crater before arriving at Bench Crater at 15:00.  Sharp Crater at 15:16, Halo Crater 15:44, Surveyor III 16:15,  Block Crater 116:58, End EVA 17:44.  I haven't checked ALSJ to get image timeline.

[apollo16uvc]

I had a looksee at Apollo 11 and 12 in the wake of claims on YouTube that the astronauts couldn't physically have taken "so many photos"; hoax theorists tend to ignore the speedy "click-turn-click-turn" of a panorama, and the number of shots that were taken simply to wind on a few frames at beginning or end of a magazine. These are only the EVA photos, and discount those taken from inside the LM.

Apollo 11 EVA photos;

120 in 151m - 1 every 75 secs, including panoramas of 12+11+13+12+8 = 56 shots, plus 7 frames wound at end of film before changing magazine (making 63)

So, broadly speaking, (120 minus 63 = ) 60 or so individual (non-panorama, non end-of-film) photos over 2h31m, an average of 1 every 1m 15s.

======================================
Apollo 12 EVA photos
4 magazines over 2 EVAs
557 in 7h50m (470m) including panoramas of 15+17+18+15+8+7+19+20+24+30 = 173

So ... generally, 325 individual photos in 470m - average 1 per 1m45s

Your formula only works if the Hasselblad 500 EL/M could only take 1 photo every 60 seconds.

Is this correct?

No

Per Hasselblad specs, the normal Hasselblad 500 EL/M could take 1 photo every second. I am not sure about the NASA modified ones. Either way, they did indeed take multiple photos within one minute. They did this often even outside of panorama's.

[Apollo 957]

Your formula only works if the Hasselblad 500 EL/M could only take 1 photo every 60 seconds.

... they did indeed take multiple photos within one minute. They did this often even outside of panorama's.

I'm sure they could. All I'm pointing out is that the number of photos were easily achievable, and not, as claimed by flatties, impossible.


Perhaps I'll rephrase;

Apollo 11 EVA photos;

The EVA lasted 151mins, during which they took 120 photos.

On raw average that is 1 every 75 secs, however this total includes panoramas consisting of 12+11+13+12+8 = 56 shots, plus 7 frames which they wound at end of film before changing magazine (56+7 making 63)

If we discount the rapid panoramas and end-of-film, then broadly speaking, we have (120 minus 63 = ) 60 or so individual (non-panorama, non end-of-film) photos over that 151m, giving them an average of 1m 15s to take each one, which is easily achievable.

[Northern Lurker]

There is one more nail in hoaxers' coffin: NASA still has negatives which can be compared to published images to see if they are meaningfully altered.

Lurky

[Glom]

Those negatives (and transparencies) would of course be fakes.

[Northern Lurker]

Those negatives (and transparencies) would of course be fakes.

Of course  That does beg the question: why pictures on the Net are photoshopped if they are scanned from images that are developed from faked negatives. Of course average hoaxie doesn't knowe there were/are film cameras in addition of todays digital cameras.

[sandopan]

Those negatives (and transparencies) would of course be fakes.

This is irony?

It's hard to figure out who's on which side sometimes