20 comments

[ 3.3 ms ] story [ 32.9 ms ] thread
Note: this has nothing to do with Gemini, Google's latest image editing model.
No amount of computational smartphone photography can match, in my eyes, the clarity and contrast and intensity of whatever analogue medium these were captured on.

This looks gorgeous. I'm extremely tempted to splurge on this, and the Apollo, books...

I assume you've watched with delight the 2019 Apollo 11 documentary assembled from previously unused 70mm footage.
You are talking about the digital, heavily processed photos here that are indeed a lot nicer than the originals taken and.printed 50 years ago. The originals were actually a bit under/over exposed (very harsh light in space), and quite grainy.
I have the "Apollo Remastered" book and it is gorgeous. I'm going to buy this one too. Obviously they went back to the original film from the missions and did a full scan. NASA almost never gives access to the original film and instead we have been seeing duplicate transparencies which involves a loss of detail and dynamic range. They were good enough back then. But these first generation scans cannot be matched for detail and color.
> Gemini 5, ended just two weeks ago, in 1965

1965 was two weeks ago?

Yep. I'm trying to find tickets for the next Beatles concert as we speak.
One of those missions lasted just shy of 14-days. Boggles the mind given the size of the Gemini capsule.
I like this, it's really cool - especially the stack images from 16 mm film. The first image (first selfie in space on Gemini 12) is very artistic but I like the original better in that example - just look at the specular highlight before and after.
I understood it less as an attempt of improvement and more as an alternate version of the same shot. Where you see more of Aldrin and other smaller bits that were less visible in the original and rightfully iconic shot.
The headline before/after image is astonishing, almost in-credible. I can't see how the left image was restored into the right. It looks like there is substantial new detail on the right that I can't see anywhere on the left.

I can only assume that the image on the left is a low resolution scan produced for this web article, and that there must be a much better scan somewhere else.

It sounds like they took the original film negatives and rescanned them. You can scan them at varying levels of light intensity to get more detail in the highlights/lowlights. By comparison a single compressed digital file is going to have a limited dynamic range.
If you are ever able to make it to the KSC visitor complex in Cape Canaveral they have mock-ups of both the Gemini and earlier Mercury capsules you can get in as a size reference. They are both incredibly tight. It's amazing during Gemini 7 they spent 14 days crammed in the capsule testing systems, doing EVA activity along with normal human activity (eating, sleeping, bodily functions). All while being seconds from death at any time if things go wrong. These early astronauts were men of a different caliber.
Anyone knows if those new photos are published on NASA images site? If they are public domain..
Fabulous, obviously.

I found the headline image confusing - thought it was a Sontaran (Dr. Who baddie) in there! Aldrin's face and the earth reflection are quite confusing to the eye.

Did they rescan the negatives for this? He mentions having access to RAW files at one point, but it's not clear.
Photography and 1960s NASA. Best combo
What does "stack hundreds and hundreds of frames to bring out incredible detail" mean, technically?
"These missions are now forgotten by most Americans, as most of the people alive during that time are now deceased."

I'm still here! I was ten years old during most of the Gemini era. I remember this stuff. I haven't forgotten.

In case anyone wants to have a go at doing this for Mercury, Gemini, or Apollo; all of the RAWs are publicly available for free:

https://tothemoon.im-ldi.com/

All the of the photographs from these missions are public domain and always have been.