Slashdot Mirror
New 'Apollo 11' Documentary Makers Discovered Never-Seen-Before Mission Footage (collectspace.com)
This year's Sundance Film Festival opened with a new 93-minute documentary crafted entirely from archival footage of NASA's Apollo 11 mission, reports collectSpace -- including some never seen before:
In the course of sourcing all of the known imagery, the National Archives (NARA) staff members made a discovery that changed the course of the project -- an unprocessed collection of 65mm footage, never before seen by the public. Unbeknownst to even the NARA archivists, the reels contained wide format scenes of the Saturn V launch, the inside of the Launch Control Center and post-mission activities aboard the USS Hornet aircraft carrier... The resulting transfer -- from which the documentary was cut -- is the highest resolution, highest quality digital collection of Apollo 11 footage in existence. "We knew that the clock was ticking, this material had been sitting around for 50 years," said director Todd Douglas Miller, commenting on the motivation behind the film scanning effort.
The other unexpected find was a massive cache of audio recordings -- more than 11,000 hours -- comprising the individual tracks from 60 members of the Mission Control team. "Apollo 11" film team members wrote code to restore the audio and make it searchable and then began the multi-year process of listening to and documenting the recordings. The effort yielded new insights into key events of the moon landing mission, as well as surprising moments of humor and camaraderie. "Much of the footage in 'Apollo 11' is, by virtue of both access and proper preservation, utterly breathtaking," wrote The Hollywood Reporter's Daniel Fienberg in his review of the film. "The sense of scale, especially in the opening minutes, sets the tone as [the] rocket is being transported to the launch pad and resembles nothing so much as a scene from 'Star Wars' only with the weight and grandeur that come from 6.5 million pounds of machinery instead of CG."
The other unexpected find was a massive cache of audio recordings -- more than 11,000 hours -- comprising the individual tracks from 60 members of the Mission Control team. "Apollo 11" film team members wrote code to restore the audio and make it searchable and then began the multi-year process of listening to and documenting the recordings. The effort yielded new insights into key events of the moon landing mission, as well as surprising moments of humor and camaraderie. "Much of the footage in 'Apollo 11' is, by virtue of both access and proper preservation, utterly breathtaking," wrote The Hollywood Reporter's Daniel Fienberg in his review of the film. "The sense of scale, especially in the opening minutes, sets the tone as [the] rocket is being transported to the launch pad and resembles nothing so much as a scene from 'Star Wars' only with the weight and grandeur that come from 6.5 million pounds of machinery instead of CG."
That guy was so demanding.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
Forgot is the wrong word. Everyone knew there were reels of extra footage that had been misplaced. Nobody thought of long-term history, back then, which is why the BBC destroyed their copy of the landings. They've been looking for further footage for a while.
But now cynics have to explain how Stanley Kubrick managed all this extra filming with the same actors at the same time, hours and hours of it, with all these extra sets, without anyone noticing.
Further, you'd still have to explain why the takes had been misplaced. It's the same people, so recorded at the same time as all the other tapes.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
Unfortunately for you, a working set of eyes does not equate to a working brain.
You think maybe they landed on different parts of the moon?
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
One's near side, one's far side. Different conditions. Very different.
One side has been blasted from space, the other has had very few impacts - might be due to a bloody great planet shielding it.
One is mostly igneous rock, one is mostly silicate.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
It's not only shielding, it's also attracting. ;-)
While the ratio might be in favor towards 'shielding', the moon still looks very much the same on both sides.
Wish the missing footage would have been of the supposed 9 mile high (or so I heard) crystal/glass towers on the dark side of the moon. Supposedly they are housing souls from earth. Totally bonkers, I know! But would make a good movie plot! Same with the supposed UFOs hiding in craters.
When was it not?
Sigh... LITERALLY...
The part of the Moon that faces us, faces us. It hasn't faced outer space in all of recorded human history, pre-history, etc.
The other side has ALWAYS been the backside pointing out into space.
If the near side of the Moon was getting hit with things, there'd be serious questions about where the fuck that stuff was coming from (yes, you might get the occasional glancing blow slip between the Earth and Moon, but to actually hit the Moon at speed, it means it came from us!
The front side of Moon (which doesn't change relative to us) is a shield for the front side of the Earth (which changes all the time - or else the Moon would be permanently overhead from only one hemisphere) ... and the Earth is a shield for the front side of the Moon.
Anything that WOULD have hit that front side of the Moon hits our backside instead. Anything that hits the backside of the Moon doesn't get to hence.
Hence:
- Pockmarked backside of the Moon.
- Clean front side of the Moon (to us).
- Earth pockmocked all over.
Thus, when choosing the first ever set of Moon landing missions you have a choice of two landing sites - one rough, pockmarked, subject to meteorites, dark, cold, from which you cannot see / communicate with the Earth. One smooth, no meteorites, bright, warm (relatively), from which you can see / communicate with the Earth.
Guess which one sensible people choose? Guess why the new Chinese lander is the FIRST to ever land on the dark-side, 50 years later? And whose plants experiments all died in hours from the extreme cold?
Honestly, because you spout conspiracy theory bullshit - think. Just for a moment. Just grab a decent reference and think about what it says for a minute or so.
Whoever thought it was a good idea to have the treble on the drums turned up and blasting every second should be strapped to a chair in an anechoic chamber, fitted with headphones, and forced to listen to that music continuously for 24 hours.
That was shit music. If you're going to use drums for something like this, you use bass. On low.
P.S. the quote at the bottom: I put up my thumb... and it blotted out the planet Earth. -- Neil Armstrong
The 1990s. It had a few oddballs, but I liked the site back then. People were generally NICE. Friendly. Supportive.
We didn't need registration for a long time, people could be trusted to enter their own username. I only registered when it became mandatory, or I would have had a lower UID.
When "top secret" Scientology texts were published on Slashdot, almost all of us defended the poster's right to do so. There was no trolling or shaming, no modding out of sight because some power user didn't like it, no mass army of sock puppets drowning the discussion.
People from the NSA were offering interviews with Slashdot, such was the credibility of the site. They don't do that for just anyone.
Katz was getting interviews with a whole bunch of other folk in government, because Slashdot mattered and people here listened.
When I talked to CmdrTaco, readership was running at 100,000 a day, more than many national newspapers.
In those days, trolls were the ones who were silenced and conspiracy nutters were left out.
I think Perenz and I are the only two left of that generation.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
Why do you refer to the far side of the moon to be "dark, cold" as opposed to the near side being "bright, warm"? I don't believe the earth warms the moon by any significant degree.
When things don't make sense, first check to see if what you think is sense actually is.
The Van Allen belts aren't a problem. NASA has never said otherwise.
You say blue screen, I say prove it.
Why should hair wave? Can you list the forces acting upon it?
The universe is not accountable for your lack of knowledge. If you don't understand, learn.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
Why should physics have to be different. One side of the moon is silicates, one side is igneous. One side is partly sheltered from incoming meteorites, the other side isn't.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
I’ve been here almost that long, though my UID doesn’t reflect that. It’s turned into a less-entertaining version of 4chan lately.
" Tiny meteoroids are hitting the moon each day and those "hits" never go away as there’s no such thing as wind."
The far side of the moon points to the universe.
Since the near side of the moon is always pointed towards us and has for a loooong time, most of the meteoroids would have to have come from earth.
But hey, why do I even try to discuss this with morons.
Nobody can repeat the Concorde either. Did the Concorde exist?
Mostly random stuff.
Absolutely true. I compared images and video made with 1960s technology to images and video from 50 years later and I noticed some differences too. Colors are washed out, and people were wearing these goofy pants that were much wider at the cuff. It doesn't make sense.
I'm sure there are a few of us old-timers around. As the focus of the site has shifted over time, I don't visit as often, but I still drop in 2 or 3 times a week.
Just because something is in the public domain doesn't mean anyone has to spend the time and money to digitally transfer the content and make it available for free online.
There. Is. NO. "Dark Side". Of. The. Moon!
eSlaps.
Okay, technically there may be a few craters which never get sun at the poles, but that's not a "side".
Table-ized A.I.
TFA annoyed me with the use of their word "chyron". Chyron Corporation makes on screen graphic software. I was unaware the trademark had been genericized, but the author thinks it can be used interchangeably with the word "graphic".
One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".