>>1693>No it wasn't
Are you fucking with me? The photos are extremely clean. >general impression of photography tech from the period that you can remember having seen.
I literally possess a photocamera of the era and one of the first digital photocameras and neither has even close to the professional-tier clean-ness in the Apollo photos (contrasted to the very poor video quality). >kinds of cameras that are used for scientific experiments
They are still limited by the general technological level of the time, as the video itself claims. High-shutter speed is unlikely to completely eliminate blur, yet each photo is clean as fuck, despite being mounted on the Astronaut's body as they moved (supposedly) on a low-gravity area and had trouble moving precisely due to the clumsiness of the suits. >professional photographers today who still use antique camera methods
That's not the same as consistent ordinary photography used for straightforward purposes>for film, which being analog has theoretically "infinite" resolution
Theoretical is a key phrase, it's not infinite in and of itself if you don't have the technology to exploit aid "infinite" resolution. The Lens width and length on the Apollo cameras is not comparable to the 'old-style' unique photographs. >They had some of the best engineers in the country design the suits to be used for various tools
1) NASA and the astronauts themselves mention the suits uncomfortable, heavy and clumsy nature, it's a tendency of suits of the time.
2) You're just making generic statements, the prime directive of the suits is to remain pressurized, sealed, and able to be moved in a bit. Use of cameras is the last priority. >the astronauts trained extensively with the suits
Yes, because those suits had extremely clumsy mobility, camera training is hardly the thing they'd be doing - surely NASA would save the photographs for the first training sessions of Astronauts. > Everything they used was tested and sometimes redesigned for the mission
Again, you're just making generic phrases about them doing things because they just did. >cope
No, it's logical deduction. People have trouble pushing buttons on regular cameras using gloves today without shaking the subsequent photograph. Underwater cameras today have massive buttons and limited zoom and rely on digital focusing. If technology had been so poor that no hoax could be made (again despite this feat being easily replicable using practical effects in movies before, during and after that time).