So went directly to NASA's website and snagged images from the Apollo 11 moon in their NASA's Apollo Lunar Surface Journal.
I was experimenting with Error Level Analysis (ELA) and detecting photoshop and got the idea that it would be fun to play with NASA images and see what ere. I won't be able to describe it in a way to do it justice. The site I used at first fotoforensics has a free interactive tutorial.
Below is quick explanation.
Error level analysis (ELA) works by intentionally re-saving the image at a known error rate, such as 95%, and then computing the difference between the images. If there is virtually no change, then the cell has reached its local minima for error at that quality level. However, if there is a large amount of change, then the pixels are not at their local minima and are effectively original.”'''
^Neal Krawetz, Ph.D. hackerfactor.com
So I specifically was interested in the photos where the moon lander is being filmed inside the shuttle I heard murmuring about something the reflections that was proof that the photos weren't what they seemed. I didnt not end up noticing anything in the reflections but I did find something.
So I Went to
Magazine 44/V (Color) Frames 6540-6696 Link
Described as
Unless otherwise noted, all images processed by Kipp Teague from raw scans provided by NASA Johnson. Images labeled "OF300" are from the original film and are presented at the equivalent of 300 DPI on an 7.5 inch by 7.5 inch reproduction.
and Randomly chose "AS11-44-6592HR" Link
Ran it through and got (link to fotoforenstic with image already uploaded)
Uhh, wow, I was kinda floored. So some experts can come and tell me all the reasons ELA is invalid, ITs a scan, it was download form internet, compressed, what they want. NOt one person has pointed to any touch-up system automated or manually carried out that produces this effect. I can tell you this looks like the same outline you would see in hte 1969 if you used Exacto knives and spicing footage. Very odd but that's just one. Lets see more
Now, you can head over and try on your own. I encourage that, and in closing I wanna show you what really convinced me and the shills could not explain.
The images above contain a landing vessel suspended in the space and complete in the open. To reproduce this suspension, no matter what the atmosphere or lack their of it would take some form of support or be actively flying/freefalling.
In some images, you could simply hold someone between the camera and the target to create in an illusion.
Demondstationi of this concept:
Here we have an image of what the craft could be supported out of frame.
Where is that effect? I am sure there is someone much better at this than me. Every photo is the same.
Edit: SOme typos and I wanna add I originally posted this on reddit here maybe a year ago. Dont wan someone thinking I am just stealing the content. There is some discussion that may interest some people there as well. Thanks.
