First HD Film of the Moon

"The Kaguya probe, now in lunar orbit, has sent down the first footage of the moon's surface from its onboard high-definition TV camera. The Kaguya mission, which consists of a main orbiter and two smaller satellites in a 100-km-high, polar orbit, is slated to officially begin its science phase in December."

Okay, I can't get the damned thing to play on here so here's the link to it.



HD Film of the Moon's Surface (http://www.jaxa.jp/press/2007/11/20071107_kaguya_movie_e.html)

Now in hi-def you can clearly see that the moon is made of cheese.

Cool !!
Jaxa (http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html) is in english as well :)

I have a stupid question. Why can't you see any stars? There's no atmosphere (well, ok, there's a tiny little atmosphere) to obfuscate them. There should be billions. Just like in the Apollo photos, there are none. Does that seem weird to anyone else? >Insert conspiracy here<

http://www.pinktentacle.com/images/moon_kaguya_3.jpg

http://www.pinktentacle.com/images/moon_kaguya_2.jpg

http://www.pinktentacle.com/images/moon_kaguya_1.jpg

Here you can see the video:
http://stage6.divx.com/user/Naughty_Wolfie/video/1838477/JAXA---World's-first-HD-footage-of-the-moon

Now in hi-def you can clearly see that the moon is made of cheese.

I KNEW IT!!!!!!!!!!!!

I have a stupid question. Why can't you see any stars? There's no atmosphere (well, ok, there's a tiny little atmosphere) to obfuscate them. There should be billions. Just like in the Apollo photos, there are none. Does that seem weird to anyone else? >Insert conspiracy here<


The main reason is that the moon (or else) below is so bright in comparison that the little tiny points of startlight are just drowned out by all the glare.
It's like having the lights on in your house and looking outside at the sky through a window.
It's difficult to see any stars because of the brightness inside and because your eyes are not "adjusted" or "adapted" (enlarged pupils, etc) for seeing very dim lights.

The lens opening and shutter speeds are set to photograph brightly lit objects.
The stars are much too faint to be seen with those settings.

The main reason is that the moon (or else) below is so bright in comparison that the little tiny points of startlight are just drowned out by all the glare.
It's like having the lights on in your house and looking outside at the sky through a window.
It's difficult to see any stars because of the brightness inside and because your eyes are not "adjusted" or "adapted" (enlarged pupils, etc) for seeing very dim lights.

The lens opening and shutter speeds are set to photograph brightly lit objects.
The stars are much too faint to be seen with those settings.


Uhmmmm Photoshop????

The main reason is that the moon (or else) below is so bright in comparison that the little tiny points of startlight are just drowned out by all the glare.
It's like having the lights on in your house and looking outside at the sky through a window.
It's difficult to see any stars because of the brightness inside and because your eyes are not "adjusted" or "adapted" (enlarged pupils, etc) for seeing very dim lights.

The lens opening and shutter speeds are set to photograph brightly lit objects.
The stars are much too faint to be seen with those settings.
Ok, I can see your point, but near the end of the video, the cam traverses onto the dark side of the moon. Why can't we see stars then? There's no reflection from the moon at that point. And still, no stars. Maybe the camera's aperture setting (I think that's the right term, I'm not a cam buff) is set to ignore the stars and just record the moon's surface? I would think it would pick up any and all ambient light though, because it's a Hi-Def camera.

I have never seen the Moon in such clear vision. All those craters, wow what a sight. Makes me hope we never lose our atmosphere.

MH, high-def doesn't mean high-sensitivity, even if this kind of cam must be !
Depending on the aperture (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aperture) it is set !
The more it is closed, the more you gain d.o.f but the less you get light & the more exposure
must be long & reversely !
Simple :)