Photos of earth

[Bryanpoprobson]

Cernan was essentially kneeling on the ground in order to get the right angle.  For most of the landing sites, Earth was more or less directly overhead.  It wasn't an easy shot to get, nor a shot considered especially important or desirable.

You can see Cernan and the position he adopted in the visor.

[Echnaton]

The lunar suits for the later J mission had more flexibility, making the bending needed for special shots easier than in the first landings,or perhaps even possible.

There was of course nothing scientific to be gained from such shots.  And while some attempts were made, there was little chance of getting a photo with more artistic impact that William Anders "earthrise" photo from Apollo 8.

[smartcooky]

Here's a really nice one from the Chinese lunar probe Chang'e 5 T1

http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2014/10/30/chang_e_5_photo_of_moon_and_earth.html


NOTE: No stars... must be faked then

[gillianren]

You know . . . I try not to ask for much, especially given my relative lack of knowledge about Apollo.  But I do get awfully sick of "why don't we see [thing]" when two minutes of research shows that we do!

[darren r]

Here's a really nice one from the Chinese lunar probe Chang'e 5 T1

http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2014/10/30/chang_e_5_photo_of_moon_and_earth.html


NOTE: No stars... must be faked then

Oh, wow...That's my new screensaver!

[darren r]

You know . . . I try not to ask for much, especially given my relative lack of knowledge about Apollo.  But I do get awfully sick of "why don't we see [thing]" when two minutes of research shows that we do!

I know what you mean. I once replied to a guy in the Daily Mail who was questioning why there were no pictures of the Lunar Rover being deployed from the LM. I pointed out to him that there are numerous videos of it cunningly concealed on Youtube!

[raven]

You know . . . I try not to ask for much, especially given my relative lack of knowledge about Apollo.  But I do get awfully sick of "why don't we see [thing]" when two minutes of research shows that we do!

I know what you mean. I once replied to a guy in the Daily Mail who was questioning why there were no pictures of the Lunar Rover being deployed from the LM. I pointed out to him that there are numerous videos of it cunningly concealed on Youtube!

Ooh, yes! It beautifully kiboshes that oldie but 'goodie', "How did they get the rover out of the LM hatch', with the short answer being 'They didn't.'

[ka9q]

Here's a really nice one from the Chinese lunar probe Chang'e 5 T1

http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2014/10/30/chang_e_5_photo_of_moon_and_earth.html

What I really like about that one is how it looks both familiar and unfamiliar, the unfamiliar part being the far side of the moon that we don't normally see. Yet this is exactly what we should see from that vantage point; it emphasizes just how far away it is.

[Al Johnston]

You know . . . I try not to ask for much, especially given my relative lack of knowledge about Apollo.  But I do get awfully sick of "why don't we see [thing]" when two minutes of research shows that we do!

I know what you mean. I once replied to a guy in the Daily Mail who was questioning why there were no pictures of the Lunar Rover being deployed from the LM. I pointed out to him that there are numerous videos of it cunningly concealed on Youtube!

Those NASA fiends!

[Photo hound]

Some of you "getting sick" will see that there are only two realistic looking photos FROM THE MOON SURFACE. stop linking me to photos taken from an orbital view. And you will see it takes more than two minutes research.

[darren r]

Some of you "getting sick" will see that there are only two realistic looking photos FROM THE MOON SURFACE. stop linking me to photos taken from an orbital view. And you will see it takes more than two minutes research.

Is two not enough for you? How many are you expecting to see? And why?

[Bryanpoprobson]

Some of you "getting sick" will see that there are only two realistic looking photos FROM THE MOON SURFACE. stop linking me to photos taken from an orbital view. And you will see it takes more than two minutes research.

There are 6 just from Apollo 11, AS11-40-5923, AS11-40-5924 and some 4 views from the LM window AS11-37-5506, AS11-37-5507, AS11-37-5508 and AS11-37-5509. 5507 wasn't very good. All of these were taken ON THE SURFACE.

The one's from 14 and 17(AS17-134-20384, AS17-134-20384, AS17-134-20461, AS17-134-20463, AS17-134-20464, AS17-134-20465, AS17-134-20471, AS17-134-20473, AS17-137-20911 and more) were taken FROM THE SURFACE, so that's already "more" than your claim with only 50 seconds research.

[HeadLikeARock]

Some of you "getting sick" will see that there are only two realistic looking photos FROM THE MOON SURFACE. stop linking me to photos taken from an orbital view. And you will see it takes more than two minutes research.

A personal favourite.

[Bryanpoprobson]

one of mine.

[AstroBrant]

There are 6 just from Apollo 11, AS11-40-5923, AS11-40-5924 and some 4 views from the LM window AS11-37-5506, AS11-37-5507, AS11-37-5508 and AS11-37-5509. 5507 wasn't very good. All of these were taken ON THE SURFACE.

The one's from 14 and 17(AS17-134-20384, AS17-134-20384, AS17-134-20461, AS17-134-20463, AS17-134-20464, AS17-134-20465, AS17-134-20471, AS17-134-20473, AS17-137-20911 and more) were taken FROM THE SURFACE, so that's already "more" than your claim with only 50 seconds research.

Now that you've given him 15, can we expect, "Yeah, but there [sic] to [sic] SMALL!"