>you will never take a self portrait this cool Space thread

File: iss044-e-45553.jpg (3MB, 4928x3280px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4928x3280px

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON D4
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2014 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.4
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern	910
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	28 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2015:08:10 16:22:49
Exposure Time	0.6 sec
F-Number	f/1.4
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	8000
Lens Aperture	f/1.4
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Spot
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	28.00 mm
Comment	NASA 2071131 91.5F
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	4928
Image Height	3280
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	High Gain Up
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>3026356

God Damn. Could you just imagine? Did they teach a crash course on exposure before sending those guys to the moon? Don't think the 500EL had AE. I have no idea how to properly expose photos on the moon, not without a lightmeter. I'd even doubt a lightmeter, it is insanely cold up there. It is like taking photos on the brightest beach without taking off your sunglasses to see how bright it really is. This photo is amazing.

Also, I'd have thought all nem cosmic rays would have done a bit more; more artifacts and what have you on the film.

File: steve robinson self portrait.jpg (1MB, 3032x2064px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3032x2064px

>>3026374
I've always had an interest in stuff like that. Regardless of how, they seem to produce consistently beautiful images.

I'd imagine it isn't that hard to make a light meter able to read in the high UV environment of space, though. I assume they were able to focus without too much difficulty with the Hasselblad.

File: soyuz tma-10m iss approach.jpg (726KB, 4256x2832px) Image search: [Google]

726KB, 4256x2832px

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON D3S
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/5.5
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern	786
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	340 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2013:09:26 10:35:07
Exposure Time	1/320 sec
F-Number	f/7.1
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	200
Lens Aperture	f/7.1
Exposure Bias	-0.7 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	340.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	4256
Image Height	2832
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	None
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

For the sake of the board servers.

http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/catalog/70mm/

NASA is a jewel. They also have 50mb tiffs floating around there.

File: Earth-Moon_system_as_seen_from_Saturn_(PIA17171).jpg (757KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

757KB, 1920x1080px

I'll end the dump with perhaps my favorite image from space. It really puts into perspective how precious our little planet is.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	1920
Image Height	1080
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2013:07:22 12:38:22
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1920
Image Height	1080

File: pale blue dot.png (526KB, 453x614px) Image search: [Google]

526KB, 453x614px

One more.

>>3026356
>"""""""""""""self"""""""""""""" portrait
Wow, this is a normie board.
Or this is some subtle trickster-tier bait.

File: .jpg (27KB, 420x280px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 420x280px

You will never draw a penis on the other planet.

>>3026374
On the moon, either they're in pitch black or full sunlight. There's no weather on the moon. So I'm guessing it's set to sunny 16 with some rudimentary focusing, like "near" and "far" marked on the lens barrel, especially judging by the depth of field on OP's photo. Also the moonlanders were trained astronauts, which is significantly nontrivial in the academic sense; photographic operation and exposure is certainly very simple in comparison.

I'm more surprised that they took colour photos at the time.

>>3026411
only someone with social or mental issues would react so strongly to something so minor. are you aware of any problems, anon?

look in the visor. another astronaut is taking the picture. it was carefully arranged so that the photographer would be reflected in the visor, and is therefore a self portrait

>>3026374
>crash course on exposure
exposure with a light meter is only difficult for the kind of retard who thinks photography is a skill and takes weeks to memorize the term "aperture". astronauts as a rule have above-retard intelligence

File: article-2010105-0CCF242E00000578-598_634x526.jpg (102KB, 634x526px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 634x526px

>>3026438
Yeah if you can judge the distance between the lander and control module and lead it in for docking, you can judge how far your crewmate is standing from you.
As for colors, it's the late 60s and early 70s so color film has gotten really good.

>>3026456
Pretty sure it's some woke ass guy from /x/ about to launch into a rant about how the moon landing was fake.

>>3026456
>>3026514
>NASAIDF activated
This is a pubic forum, I won't be silenced.

>>3026530
Someone once asked Sir Patrick Moore what he says to Moon landing conspiracy theorists. He replied: "I don't".