Panove jsou sama legracka koukam. Panove neznaji konstrukci EVA skafandru. Teda Puntik urcite, Radkovi bych nerad krivdil.
"Pokud jsou tam lidi a je v plechový pixle, tak nijak."
Co to je za argument, pokud jsou tam lidi? Jak souvisi odolnost filmoveho materialu s clovekem?
Nejdriv by sis mel Puntiku par desitek udajnych fotek z povrchu Mesice prohlednout a hlavne si neco o tom precist, abys tu netrepal vlastni teorie. Ja vedel ze se chytis, ikdyz musim pripustit, ze je tu moznost, ze i to, co tvrdi NASA, je rovnez pouha "teorie"
Each astronaut had his own camera. (Apart from the Apollo 11 EVA.) It was a square-format specially-built Hasselblad. It was mounted on a chest-plate for the astronaut to operate. The astronaut had to manually set the shutter speed and apertures while wearing bulky, pressurized gloves and without being able to see the controls. The cameras had NO VIEWFINDER, so the astronaut could only guess at what was being photographed. Each camera had a bulk film magazine holding more than a hundred exposures. The film (mainly Ektachrome color film) had a very narrow exposure range, which required PERFECT aperture and shutter settings, because according to NASA, the cameras did not have automatic exposure capability.
Tu nepovedenou retus nocni oblohy uz jsem tu prezentoval, tak ted se treba muzes zamerit na stopy po lunarnim modulu, respektive jejich zahadnou absenci na mnoha snimcich. V dalsim kole to muze byt hodne divne zobrazeni Slunce, ktere jako Slunce proste nevypada, zejmena pak v primem srovnani se zabery Slunce napr. z ISS.
Pro LHE: resim pouze verohodnost publikovanych fotografii, nic vic, nic min.