Apollo Discussions > The Reality of Apollo

Stabilised Apollo 16 LRV Footage

(1/2) > >>

Inanimate Carbon Rod:


Also, check out the comments from the hoaxers - the usual mix of ill informed comments about radiation and that special YouTube stupid we all know and love - in fact it's like peering into a raging furnace of stupid.

Inanimate Carbon Rod:
On a related point, does any know what the duration of the longest continual take of any LRV is?

RAF:
I had not seen that, before...thanks for posting it.

ka9q:
Video stabilization can be a godsend. I wish it had been around in the early 1960s when the Zapruder film was still new.

It works best for handheld footage. It isn't as effective on the later footage taken by the camera mounted on the moving LRV.

I notice there's some residual distortion due to the lens as the camera direction changes. I wonder how hard it would be for a stabilizer program to correct for that too. It would somehow have to be told the precise details of the lens, though.

Glom:
That is so cool.

The distortion caused by the changing angle is quite noticeable.  Would that be described as astigmatism in the lens?  It's like the camera is drunk.

But I don't know I like the way the dust billows off those wheels.  I don't think that's the way dust should billow on Earth.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page