Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Australia Moon Space Science

Unseen Moon Landing Video Released 212

Posted by CmdrTaco
from the nice-soundstage dept.
bazzalunatic writes "Digitally remastered footage of the moon landing, including high-quality and brighter images of Neil Armstrong stepping off the ladder will be shown for the first time ever to the general public at an awards ceremony in Sydney, Australia. The magnetic data tapes seem to have all been lost — erased — by NASA, so all that's left are VHS recordings, which have been restored, giving the best-ever film of the whole moon landing. The publicity over this seems to be pushing NASA into releasing the whole 3-hour recording."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Unseen Moon Landing Video Released

Comments Filter:
  • Bah! (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 30, 2010 @09:44AM (#33746994)

    It was a sound stage on mars

    • by GooberToo (74388)

      They'll never release these videos in HD because you would see all the strings. ;)

      • by Sulphur (1548251)

        They'll never release these videos in HD because you would see all the strings. ;)

        Strings are characters in order. I think you mean guidelines.

        Seriously, we left arrays of corner reflectors on the Moon.
        An astronomer with a telescope and a laser can show that they are there.

  • VHS recordings? (Score:5, Informative)

    by mcgrew (92797) * on Thursday September 30, 2010 @09:44AM (#33747012) Homepage Journal

    There was no Video Home System [wikipedia.org] when the moon landings happened. There was reel to reel tape, and cinescope, but no VHS until 1976.

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by the_humeister (922869)

      There was no Video Home System [wikipedia.org] when the moon landings happened. There was reel to reel tape, and cinescope, but no VHS until 1976.

      It's a faaaaaaaaake! [youtube.com]

      • by tg123 (1409503)

        There was no Video Home System [wikipedia.org] when the moon landings happened. There was reel to reel tape, and cinescope, but no VHS until 1976.

        It's a faaaaaaaaake! [youtube.com]

        Oh boy ... Never really thought about it like that . LOL Your gonna bring all the freaks out now.

        What I heard was the Moon landing was done on a soundstage with a sandbox as a set and Bungee cords for moving.

        This story just proves it I mean how likely is it that just found a Vhs copy in someone garage and all the high quality masters just happened to be erased ??? (Lol.... ducks... sorry Nasa type people joke..... )

        • by Lumpy (12016)

          That's why they wont release all the footage that shows the boom mics, the director calling cut and making them reshoot it.. or Neil in his suit screaming at a lighting guy who was walking around on set.

          rare audio clip of this being hidden my the Masons on youtube...

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BpTniT-Fm8 [youtube.com]

          The Illuminati hies things all over youtube!

          • Im sure there are millions of people that come on the net claiming things that arent the truth, and I could care less if you believe this or not. But, Neil is a close personal friend of my family, Ive met him personally (though briefly) once, and he has some very interesting and detailed stories about his experience. I cant imagine that he would make up that sort of detail, and continue to propigate such a lie with even with his close friends for so long. Not to mention that it just seems unlikely that afte
    • Re:VHS recordings? (Score:5, Informative)

      by tverbeek (457094) on Thursday September 30, 2010 @09:52AM (#33747150) Homepage

      RTFA: It's a 1980s dupe onto VHS of the original reel-to-reel.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by MozeeToby (1163751)

        So... Taken with a high definition camera, beamed 400,000 km, received in Australia, displayed on a low resolution screen, recorded with a camera pointed at said screen, sent around the world to the US, saved on reel to reel tapes, dubbed from reel to reel to VHS, digitized and uploaded to a computer, digitally enhanced, and then made available to the world on the internet. And even ignoring the fact that every step of the process could only ever remove information, it's still probably one of the most impo

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by mcgrew (92797) *

        Usually I do RTFA, but in this case I didn't see what TFA could add, unless the video of the landing itself is linked. There are way too many times I bother to go to TFA only to find that it's just the /. summary with a lot of padding and usually a whole lot of annoying advertising. (example) [slashdot.org]

    • Re:VHS recordings? (Score:5, Informative)

      by commodore64_love (1445365) on Thursday September 30, 2010 @09:57AM (#33747242) Journal

      There was no VHS at the time of the airing of the First, Second, or Third Doctors either.

      Nevertheless some of the lost episodes were recovered from VHS or Betamax because that's all we have left. Perhaps some engineer copied the original 1969 tapes over to a VHS collection. Then the originals were erased by an idiot, so all that's left are the backups.

      Aside - VHS is a really crummy format for storage. Only ~320 pixels across by 486 scanlines. The original magnetic tapes from 1969 probably offered the full resolution possible with NTSC-I, or about ~640x480. Super VHS can capture that full resolution, but not regular VHS.

      • by mcgrew (92797) *

        Aside - VHS is a really crummy format for storage. Only ~320 pixels across by 486 scanlines. The original magnetic tapes from 1969 probably offered the full resolution possible with NTSC-I, or about ~640x480.

        Without actually looking that up I think you have the VHS numbers backwards. NTSC (Standard US analog TV format) has 525 scan lines, with only 486 visible (the rest oer used for synchronization and vertical retrace) and VHS is interlaced. I think VHS is 486 wide and 260 scan lines, but I could be wrong

      • by LanMan04 (790429)

        Info on Apollo cameras:

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_TV_camera [wikipedia.org]

        On the surface camera, we're talking 250 lines at 10fps. So not exactly staggering to begin with.

  • by Enderwiggin13 (734997) on Thursday September 30, 2010 @09:45AM (#33747030)
    I'll hold out for the inevitable 3D Extended Edition BluRay Director's Cut.
    • by grub (11606) * <slashdot@grub.net> on Thursday September 30, 2010 @09:46AM (#33747058) Homepage Journal

      I'll hold out for the inevitable 3D Extended Edition BluRay Director's Cut.

      Rumour has it George Lucas is working on a version in which Michael Collins steps on the Moon first.
    • by Joce640k (829181)

      I'm still waiting for the first cut. There's still a week to go and this is the second slashdot story on it...sheesh.

    • by dkleinsc (563838)

      In this version, does Neil not flub his line?

    • Am I the only one who sees the growth of mad conspiracy theories such as the "faked moon landing" as a sign post on the road the the decline of our civilization?

      I was at a party a while ago in which I met a seemingly intelligent professional who seemed to honestly believe that humans never landed on the moon. I suspect that though some of the posts calling the landing fake are trolls, I believe that many who believe the landing is fake are sincere. I do not believe this is a harmless trend.

      Voltaire had an

      • I usually recommend Phil Plait's 'Bad Astronomy' to moon landing hoax believers. It's entertaining and accessible.

        I read your post then noticed that the link to your profile has already been visited. You, sir, are well read and reasonable - what are you doing here?
      • by abigor (540274)

        Yeah, I'm also shocked at how many youngish people (up to, say, early 20s) believe it was faked. I'm not sure if it's just a hip contrarian stance or a cynical view of government endeavours of all sorts or what, but it's pretty depressing.

        Anecdotally, I know a woman in her late 30s who believes they were faked. She is a director at the local Science World.

        • Anecdotally, I know a woman in her late 30s who believes they were faked. She is a director at the local Science World.

          OMG 8-(

          Most of the moon landing deniers I know are 40+. I only know a couple of them my age, one is a total tinfoil-hatter in general (an IT guy who works for a hotel), and the other I just learned is such a raging gay basher that she thinks "the gays are taking over the world." (the receptionist at my office).

      • by mosb1000 (710161)

        People believe it was faked because they don't want to believe we were capable of something 40 years ago that we are not capable of today. They want to have hope for the future, but the moon landing is an obvious sign of decline (or rather, the fact that it happened so long and we can't do it today is an obvious sign of decline).

        • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

          by Richy_T (111409)

          Oh, we could get there again. It's just that these days, if we want to go to a derelict hell-hole, we have Detroit.

        • People believe it was faked because they don't want to believe we were capable of something 40 years ago that we are not capable of today. They want to have hope for the future, but the moon landing is an obvious sign of decline (or rather, the fact that it happened so long and we can't do it today is an obvious sign of decline).

          ]

          Understandable...yes. Excusable...no. In fact I might argue that our tendency to discard objective facts for fanciful opinions lies somewhere near the root of why we no longer have the ability to travel to the moon. We are, I believe running our society based on fanciful ideologies that are not good models for reality, be they economic ideologies or social ideologies. We ascribe certainty to dubious systems of ideas, while exaggerating the inherent inductive uncertainty of the scientific process.

          I

      • by tibit (1762298)

        Worse yet, this all starts with school and parents, at an early age. You tell your kid "don't ask stupid questions" or "because it is so" once too many times, and they learn for you to turn rationality off. Then they grow up believing all sorts of crap.

  • Yes, the iphone was invented in 1967..
  • Wait... WTF why would NASA "erase" the originals? wouldn't that seem like too momentous of an occasion to destroy???!?!?!?! Or am I miss-reading something here?
    • by pavon (30274) on Thursday September 30, 2010 @09:59AM (#33747292)

      Yes, the idiots reused the tape [wikipedia.org].

      • by hazee (728152)

        Am I right in thinking that data recovery firms (and government agencies) can pull data off a hard drive, even after it's been overwritten - possibly several times? (Yes, if you overwrite it with random noise, that might make it hard to guess what was there before, but if you just record a normal file or video over the top, that'll have a set of known statistics that make it possible to subtract out and recover the earlier data.)

        And if that's the case, why can't they recover the original recordings - which

        • by tsa (15680)

          Because those tapes are recorded in an analog format instead of digital, which makes recovery impossible.

        • Am I right in thinking that data recovery firms (and government agencies) can pull data off a hard drive, even after it's been overwritten - possibly several times? (Yes, if you overwrite it with random noise, that might make it hard to guess what was there before, but if you just record a normal file or video over the top, that'll have a set of known statistics that make it possible to subtract out and recover the earlier data.)

          Actually with modern hard drives 1 wipe with 1s, 0s, or random data is enough. 2 wipes if you want to be extra sure. Just the other day I noticed that the Linux wipe utility's "quick" mode does 4 wipes! WTF, get with the times!

        • by tibit (1762298)

          No one can "pull data" off a modern hard drive after you overwrite it just once. Stop believing in fairytales.

          As for analog recordings -- with audio recordings that were erased once but not overwritten, you can usually make out words. With video, whatever quality is left is so poor that even a 3rd gen copy from that will look better.

    • SOP.

      Tapes where expensive and took a while to get. SOP was to reuse the tapes.
      Hey, you wouldn't want them wasting tax dollars on a tape that would just be sitting around, would you?
      It's important to remember the context. From pretty much everyones point of view, they would be going to the moon so often it wouldn't be a big deal.

      And they where only reused one they had been ensured it had been taped for broad cast. That meant there where many copies in many formats. well 3 formats I think.

      There was also a format issue in the 80's the made them reuse tapes for a period. IIRC

      • by Culture20 (968837)

        It's important to remember the context. From pretty much everyones point of view, they would be going to the moon so often it wouldn't be a big deal.

        Just like because I live in the U.S., visiting Plymouth Rock holds no value because I'm always on U.S. soil. Substitute any historical site. Reusing those tapes was a bonehead move.

      • by kimvette (919543)

        There was also a format issue in the 80's the made them reuse tapes for a period. IIRC

        Right, because Betacam and VHS recorders were not readily available, so they destroyed original footage of monumental achievements.

        I understand the root cause: NASA has since the '70s been under-funded but still - they could have saved the footage by going to newer, superior and less expensive formats and preserve the original media.

        • by delinear (991444)
          Agreed - if they needed cash so much, surely they could have sold the originals for many, many times their worth as digital recording media to any number of national museums who would have lovingly preserved them.
      • by StikyPad (445176)

        It's important to remember the context. From pretty much everyones point of view, they would be going to the moon so often it wouldn't be a big deal.

        No, the context was a worldwide event that inspired and united a generation, nay, a populous, on a scale never seen before or since, and everyone at the time was well aware of the significance. It was the *first* human exploration of an extraterrestrial body, and the first recording thereof. The first of anything is always more historic, important, and monume

    • by master_p (608214)

      The most important achievement of humanity...and the official records are destroyed.

      If that does not smell hoax, I don't know what does...!!!

    • If you look at the NASA staffing for the data collection areas during that time you will not see the position Archivist anywhere. Lots of engineers and scientists but no qualified librarians or archivists.
  • Aliens? (Score:2, Funny)

    by brycethorup (1682864)
    Does this mean I finally get to see the shootout with the aliens they had? Sweet!
  • Old men (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Thanshin (1188877) on Thursday September 30, 2010 @09:50AM (#33747124)

    An old man, sitting in his couch, watching himself in an old college football match. Repeating over and over the twenty seconds where he scored a touchdown.

    But the old man isn't really old. He has a strong, young body. He could stand up and go play another football match. Score another touchdown. But he's too tired, so he'll just play the old tape. Over and over again.

    • Re:Old men (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Kell Bengal (711123) on Thursday September 30, 2010 @10:05AM (#33747384)
      Bravo. That just says it all.
    • Behold!; The West.

    • by Shimmer (3036)

      Are you kidding me? That moon landing was an all-time milestone in human history, comparable to Columbus discovering America. Would you mock a video of that also?

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by DigiShaman (671371)

        If I'm reading the parent post correctly, he's basically saying that rather than go out for another moon landing today, we can instead sit back and reminisce over glory days of the past. It's nothing to do with the video itself, but rather the attitude behind showing the video to the public.

        Well screw that. Lets make history by looking toward the future rather then looking back which accomplishes little to nothing in the process.

    • by mosb1000 (710161)

      The first paragraph is true. The second is probably not.

    • by gad_zuki! (70830)

      >But he's too tired, so he'll just play the old tape. Over and over again.

      More like, old men watch their past glories while young men plan new ideas old men couldn't conceive, namely privatization of LEO and GEO for a fraction of the cost and a new capsule and rocket system for an asteroid mission in 15 years and an eventual Mars mission, while the old men keep rambling about the moon.

    • An old man, sitting in his couch, watching himself in an old college football match. Repeating over and over the twenty seconds where he scored a touchdown.

      But the old man isn't really old. He has a strong, young body. He could stand up and go play another football match. Score another touchdown. But he's too tired, so he'll just play the old tape. Over and over again.

      What you're forgetting to mention is that the man was only playing football in college to spite a rival college and that he was funding his

  • Warning (Score:2, Funny)

    by reitton (1443679)
    This video may not be suitable for kids under the age of 70
  • by kick6 (1081615)
    Why is the first public broadcast of remastered footage of an American moon trip being broadcast in Australia. This makes no sense.
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by ColdWetDog (752185)

      Why is the first public broadcast of remastered footage of an American moon trip being broadcast in Australia. This makes no sense.

      Why do we keep getting stupid questions from people who have obviously not bothered to RTFA? No, I'm not going to tell you either, it's too early in the morning to be nice.

    • by geekoid (135745)

      Because that's where the award ceremony is and Buzz Aldrin will be there. You HAVE heard of Buzz Aldrin, right?

      Plus Australia played some important roles in the Apollo mission.

    • by icegreentea (974342) on Thursday September 30, 2010 @10:35AM (#33747786)

      The source tapes were from Australia. The highest quality video from the moon landing were in Australia. Since they decided to land on the moon early, the US was under the horizon, so they transmitted to Australia instead.

  • by Fallen Kell (165468) on Thursday September 30, 2010 @09:53AM (#33747174)
    They are saying that only a VHS tape of the landing is left, and that all the original tapes were erased/lost/destroyed. But this new tape is FROM one of those original tapes, albeit from the Sydney archives who relayed the data since they were part of the line-of-sight network to communicate with the astronauts.
    • by Sockatume (732728)

      It's a severely degraded VHS dupe of one of the Sydney recordings. There's no archive copy to refer to.

  • I don't understand why people get so excited over seeing the live broadcast when there is so much footage they they taped on the moon that's in colour.
  • Who did it? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward

    "We discovered, to our horror, that in the 1970s and 80s NASA had taken the tapes in the national archive and erased them all to record other missions."

    It's an archive, right? There will be records of who did this, yes? And you have the death penalty in the US - which you tend to otherwise use for inconsequential stuff mostly?

    • I'm sure there is something on the books for "destroying a national treasure"
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by CaptainLard (1902452)

      And you have the death penalty in the US - which you tend to otherwise use for inconsequential stuff mostly?

      Yeah we in the US tend to use the death penalty all willy nilly, mainly on those who put long term planning into their well thought out murders. But I'm sure you didn' t know any of the victims so you personally could say those crimes were inconsequential.

      ...not saying the death penalty its right, just saying the US isn't all like the worlds caricature of Texas. Aside from their ridiculous school text book mandates, neither is all of Texas for that matter.

    • by mcgrew (92797) *

      The death penalty is only for a select few, horrible crimes -- mass murder, murder by torture, treason. Not many more, and all involve someone (or usually more than one simeone) dying horribly.

      You don't get the death penalty for burning a book or erasing a tape.

  • TFA is wrong (Score:3, Informative)

    by hcdejong (561314) <hobbes&xmsnet,nl> on Thursday September 30, 2010 @10:02AM (#33747330)

    At the time of the Moon landing, three stations - Goldstone in California, Honeysuckle Creek in Canberra, and Parkes in New South Wales - simultaneously recorded the events onto magnetic data tape. The direct recordings were not of broadcast quality, says John, so they had to set up a regular TV camera pointed at a small black-and-white TV screen in the observatory to obtain higher-quality images that could be relayed to television stations around the world.

    They didn't use the TV camera to obtain a higher quality, but to convert from the odd signal used by NASA [1] to PAL/NTSC.

    1: the nonstandard TV signals were used to make video transmission possible in the small amount of bandwidth available.

  • by johnw (3725) on Thursday September 30, 2010 @10:02AM (#33747336)

    As long as the Australian presenter doesn't announce that it was Buzz Aldrin who got off the ladder first.

  • Higher Quality?!?! (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Really? in my opinion it looks like crap. The original one has some noise, and a hell of a lot more detail, look at the moon's surface around the rover compared to this "higher quality" remaster. There is almost no detail there, just a gray blur.

    It literally looks like they just removed the little bit of noise, which i really didn't see a problem with, and then ran it though a soft focus filter

  • Abuse (Score:3, Funny)

    by gmuslera (3436) on Thursday September 30, 2010 @10:13AM (#33747490) Homepage Journal
    This time George Lucas has gone too far into the star wars prequel territory
    • by mea37 (1201159)

      How would a story set in the 60's be a prequel to stories set a long time ago in a galaxy far away?

  • I'm not impressed (Score:3, Insightful)

    by erroneus (253617) on Thursday September 30, 2010 @10:19AM (#33747582) Homepage

    I know "they always intended for it to be brighter and in high definition but they didn't have the budget to do it at the time..." Call me when they announce that it is being remade in 3D.

  • at the first, and so far, only post on the site:

    "Digitally remastered = digitally re-faked"

  • by mea37 (1201159) on Thursday September 30, 2010 @10:24AM (#33747636)

    "high-quality and brighter images of Neil Armstrong stepping off the ladder"

    Oh, good, the remastered moon landing. In a year or two we'll get the special edition, with all new special effects. The once-lifeless moon will have all manner of alien life. Probably the golf ball will swing first at the astronauts.

    Additional footage of the astronauts' training will be released, but it will be unpopular with fans of the oringal moon landing. Much of the criticism will focus on a goofy sidekick they meet, who somehow seems to play an important role in spite of being a babbling fool.

    Later there will be a DVD release with the SE footage alongside the video as it originally aired. HD and 3D versions will follow eventually.

  • Let's hope that they digitally added some stars in the backgrounds in order to placate the conspiracy theorists from believing the footage has been faked.
  • by albertid (1905910) on Thursday September 30, 2010 @10:40AM (#33747862)
    Digitally rerendered footage of the moon landing, ...
  • remastered? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by KnightBlade (1074408)
    Does the original image on the left, in the video actually look sharper to anyone else than the remastered one? I find the remastered one looks blurry. :S

As in certain cults it is possible to kill a process if you know its true name. -- Ken Thompson and Dennis M. Ritchie

Working...