Moonlanding cam
« on: April 21, 2021, 07:24:25 PM »
Hi!

Just created an account for that:

I found my dad's old minolta camera, with analog film. And i noticed that the material is highly temperature sensitiv, and whats even more important: radiation sensitive.

I coudn't find any details about the film on apollo missions, just that it was made thinner to get more pictures on a single roll (seriously? Doesn't that make it even more temp. sensitive?).

Everyone's talking about how special the cameras are increased durability blabla....

But there not a single chance to prevent cosmic radiation from passing through a camera, that is built to be as lightweight as possible. With a lot of lead maybe.
And a superfast heavy lead shutter.

Anyone here got a serious explanation?

Re: Moonlanding cam
« Reply #1 on: April 22, 2021, 07:32:25 AM »
And i noticed that the material is highly temperature sensitiv, and whats even more important: radiation sensitive.

And how did you notice this? Why do you accept this to be true? Why do you believe cosmic radiation is a real thing?

*

Offline Tumeni

  • *
  • Posts: 2649
    • View Profile
Re: Moonlanding cam
« Reply #2 on: April 22, 2021, 07:34:46 AM »
What temperature(s) do you think the film was at?
=============================
Not Flat. Happy to prove this, if you ask me.
=============================

Nearly all flat earthers agree the earth is not a globe.

Nearly?

Re: Moonlanding cam
« Reply #3 on: April 22, 2021, 08:25:59 AM »
And i noticed that the material is highly temperature sensitiv, and whats even more important: radiation sensitive.

And how did you notice this? Why do you accept this to be true? Why do you believe cosmic radiation is a real thing?

On the package it says: protect from heat and x-ray.

Just noticed a contradiction. Cosmic radiation does exist, just go up with a balloon and measure it. If it is cosmic, is a different question. But inside the logic of "we've been at the moon, and made some photos", theres a logical mistake. Just read first post again

*

Offline Tumeni

  • *
  • Posts: 2649
    • View Profile
Re: Moonlanding cam
« Reply #4 on: April 22, 2021, 08:47:36 AM »
And i noticed that the material is highly temperature sensitiv, and whats even more important: radiation sensitive.

And how did you notice this? Why do you accept this to be true? Why do you believe cosmic radiation is a real thing?

On the package it says: protect from heat and x-ray.

Just noticed a contradiction. Cosmic radiation does exist, just go up with a balloon and measure it. If it is cosmic, is a different question. But inside the logic of "we've been at the moon, and made some photos", theres a logical mistake. Just read first post again

Are X-rays a significant component of this cosmic radiation?
=============================
Not Flat. Happy to prove this, if you ask me.
=============================

Nearly all flat earthers agree the earth is not a globe.

Nearly?

Re: Moonlanding cam
« Reply #5 on: April 22, 2021, 09:00:23 AM »

Are X-rays a significant component of this cosmic radiation?

When you rode up in your balloon and measured the cosmic radiation, were X-rays a significant component?

Re: Moonlanding cam
« Reply #6 on: April 22, 2021, 02:21:32 PM »
And i noticed that the material is highly temperature sensitiv, and whats even more important: radiation sensitive.

And how did you notice this? Why do you accept this to be true? Why do you believe cosmic radiation is a real thing?

On the package it says: protect from heat and x-ray.

Just noticed a contradiction. Cosmic radiation does exist, just go up with a balloon and measure it. If it is cosmic, is a different question. But inside the logic of "we've been at the moon, and made some photos", theres a logical mistake. Just read first post again

Are X-rays a significant component of this cosmic radiation?

https://www.nasa.gov/analogs/nsrl/why-space-radiation-matters

https://fstoppers.com/film/tips-traveling-film-dont-be-naive-x-ray-scanning-kills-film-206051

*

Offline Tumeni

  • *
  • Posts: 2649
    • View Profile
Re: Moonlanding cam
« Reply #7 on: April 22, 2021, 05:25:54 PM »
https://www.nasa.gov/analogs/nsrl/why-space-radiation-matters

https://fstoppers.com/film/tips-traveling-film-dont-be-naive-x-ray-scanning-kills-film-206051

First link states X-rays are a component of solar radiation, but not a majority one;

Quote
The Sun emits all wavelengths in the electromagnetic spectrum (EM). The majority is in the form of visible, infrared, and ultraviolet radiation (UV). Occasionally, giant explosions, called solar flares, occur on the surface of the Sun and release massive amounts of energy out into space in the form of x-rays, gamma rays, and streams of protons and electrons.

Solar flares may well contain X-rays, but no solar flares occurred during any Apollo mission.

=============================
Not Flat. Happy to prove this, if you ask me.
=============================

Nearly all flat earthers agree the earth is not a globe.

Nearly?

Offline scomato

  • *
  • Posts: 64
    • View Profile
Re: Moonlanding cam
« Reply #8 on: April 22, 2021, 05:56:10 PM »
 a
« Last Edit: April 26, 2021, 03:34:35 PM by scomato »

Offline c0i9z

  • *
  • Posts: 15
    • View Profile
Re: Moonlanding cam
« Reply #9 on: April 23, 2021, 03:16:10 AM »
If you go here, you'll find very good answers to a similar question: https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/17301/how-was-it-possible-for-the-apollo-11-to-film-and-take-pictures-with-such-radiat

In summary, it seems that between the short mission time, quick development time and specially treated film, they managed to keep the effects of radiation damage minor, though perhaps occasionally noticeable.
« Last Edit: April 23, 2021, 11:22:45 PM by c0i9z »

Re: Moonlanding cam
« Reply #10 on: April 23, 2021, 08:33:12 AM »
If you go here, you'll find very food answers to a similar question: https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/17301/how-was-it-possible-for-the-apollo-11-to-film-and-take-pictures-with-such-radiat

In summary, it seems that between the short mission time, quick development time and specially treated film, they managed to keep the effects of radiation damage minor, though perhaps occasionally noticeable.

thanks, thats what i call i useful answer.