Moon it's own source of light

[d taylor]

Your photographs clearly show changes in the lit areas.

??

This thread is baffling.

Well if this could be done in person, while actually looking at the moon through the camera it would be a better debate/discussion.

 

[d taylor]

So the moon is reflecting light from the sun, so this reflecting line is strong enough to reflect off of the moons surface and travel 230,000+ miles.

But this reflecting light is not strong enough to bathe an astronaut in reflected light, as it travels from the surface of the moon to earth. Why is this astronaut not aglow in reflected light.

Kind of sounds like gravity, it is there but it just can not be felt or in the case of the reflected light it can not be seen.

 

[d taylor]

-​

All that is seen for lighting in these photos is directional lighting

 

[BeyondET]

-​

All that is seen for lighting in these photos is directional lighting

directly from sunlight beaming on him.

 

[d taylor]

directly from sunlight beaming on him.

Try again and try studio lighting

 

[JacksBratt]

-​

All that is seen for lighting in these photos is directional lighting

The light in these photos if from Stanley Kubrick's camera crew.

 

[BeyondET]

Try again and try studio lighting

i don't see a studio or studio lighting in the photo debunked.

 

[JacksBratt]

i don't see a studio or studio lighting in the photo debunked.

Well, it wouldn't be a very good studio if you could see the studio... or at least I wouldn't thinks so.

 

[Tom 1]

Try again and try studio lighting

The technology to set up a shot like that didn’t exist until decades later. I don’t really know why I’m bothering to answer. Each of your posts simply reveals that you lack the basic knowledge needed to evaluate your own ideas. You could remedy that by working through some basic books on the relevant topics.

 

[Paul4JC]

...God's lightbulb! Not Edison's.

 

[Tom 1]

So the moon is reflecting light from the sun, so this reflecting line is strong enough to reflect off of the moons surface and travel 230,000+ miles.

But this reflecting light is not strong enough to bathe an astronaut in reflected light, as it travels from the surface of the moon to earth. Why is this astronaut not aglow in reflected light.

Kind of sounds like gravity, it is there but it just can not be felt or in the case of the reflected light it can not be seen.

View attachment 307476​

You understand the meaning of the word ‘shadow’, yes?

 

[d taylor]

So the moon who is putting off enough light to easily illuminate these clouds 230,000+ miles away. That light would not be seen as engulfing any object on the moons surface in reflected light.

​

 

[Tom 1]

So the moon who is putting off enough light to easily illuminate these clouds 230,000+ miles away. That light would not be seen as engulfing any object on the moons surface in reflected light.

View attachment 307494

View attachment 307495

View attachment 307501

​

I’m not sure what point you think you are making, but your confusion over light and shadow certainly debunks your moon emits light idea.

 

[d taylor]

The technology to set up a shot like that didn’t exist until decades later. I don’t really know why I’m bothering to answer. Each of your posts simply reveals that you lack the basic knowledge needed to evaluate your own ideas. You could remedy that by working through some basic books on the relevant topics.

I ignore most of your insulting post, but since i making my living from art and painting, paintings involving observation of light and shadow. I will just add this (your latest postings) to the list of your ignorance of light and shadow and will ignore the rest of them again.

 

[Tom 1]

I ignore most of your insulting post, but since i making my living from art and painting, paintings involving observation of light and shadow. I will just add this (your latest postings) to the list of your ignorance of light and shadow and will ignore the rest of them again.

Then perhaps you can use some real information. What lighting equipment could have been used in the late 60s to set up that shot? You can refer to the technical requirements and how it would have been done. No links to videos of someone else giving what you think is an explanation please.

 

[d taylor]

You understand the meaning of the word ‘shadow’, yes?

You think you are such a keen observer (light, shadow, etc..) the get a pencil and paper and show me your observational skills.

 

[Tom 1]

I ignore most of your insulting post, but since i making my living from art and painting, paintings involving observation of light and shadow. I will just add this (your latest postings) to the list of your ignorance of light and shadow and will ignore the rest of them again.

It also shouldn’t be difficult for you to explain why a shadow on the moon would in fact be much darker than the shadow cast by a person in a comparable scenario on earth.

 

[Tom 1]

You think you are such a keen observer (light, shadow, etc..) the get a pencil and paper and show me your observational skills.

What you observe and what you think explains what you observe are two different issues.

 

[BeyondET]

Well, it wouldn't be a very good studio if you could see the studio... or at least I wouldn't thinks so.

True but the burden to prove it is a studio is on the one who says it is. Though photos can be allusions, street art causes the mirage of sorts kind of weird how it happens

 

[Tom 1]

So the moon who is putting off enough light to easily illuminate these clouds 230,000+ miles away. That light would not be seen as engulfing any object on the moons surface in reflected light.

View attachment 307494

View attachment 307495

View attachment 307501

​

No, that would be the case if the moon somehow emitted light rather than reflected it.