Comments on: Moonwalk footage being restored after original video lost

A Hollywood post-production house is working to re-create images of astronaut Neil Armstrong's historic moon walk. Here is how Lowry Digital is approaching the project.

This will definitely make those NASA moon-landing conspiracy theory supporters very happy, because now they have got "recreated" fodder to survive!!

[srleeplus3377]

they changed the flag waving in the wind original video had it waving in the wind now its still suspcious if u ask me there isnt supposed to be any wind on moon and what with all the graphic technolgies

[blusky08]

"NASA acknowledged on Thursday that the original TV footage of the moon landing on July 20, 1969, was accidentally erased."

Have to admit that it is bit odd that this happens at a time in history when a) other moon visits are likely in the near future that would be compared to the original, and b) video analysis is becoming more advanced than ever before.

Now, any attempt to debunk the moon landing will face the additional task of proving that any given footage is actual footage or altered footage. Clever or coincidence?

[OctoChops]

"NASA acknowledged on Thursday that the original TV footage of the moon landing on July 20, 1969 was accidentally erased"

LOL sure it was. Just admit we didn't land on the moon already.

[AKCHEF72]

The newer still showing here are horrible....the 2009 version looks blurred versus the original which seems to be sharper...the shadows on the rocks on the original are much more focased...who gives a crap about the reflection in Niels visor when it looks like they are walking on a piece of cheese?
I hope they fired the nerd who recorded the Merv Griffin show over the original tape...sheesh!

[rafusee2]

"good to have you on our show today Mr. Armstrong. I understand you recently traveled abroad..."

[SJ2571]

"NASA acknowledged on Thursday that the original TV footage of the moon landing on July 20, 1969 was accidentally erased" -- Umm, old news? I read this exact story of their admission like a year or two ago. Love how news agencies re-hash old news to make it "new" again.

[Buz74]

What a load crap. How can they expect anyone to believe they accidently erased the footage of their greatest achievement. When you consider the attention to detail in all their missions and projects this just sounds ridiculous. They would have made countless copies and backups/archives like any organisation. God knows what the real story is but somethings not right. Ive no doubt they did land on the moon but theres something odd about the footage for apollo 11 misssion compared to the other missions. When you watch the released docos of all their missions apollo 11 seems to show the least footage but yet its the most important. I can see why their are so many conspiracy theories.

[zyxxy]

They didn't really care about the live broadcast feed. They were far more interested in the film cameras that were on the astronauts and on the lunar surface. Those, however, were not live, but had to be returned to earth to be processed, so they weren't as media friendly. Where you alive in 1969? I was. And the technology was pretty poor. Plus the link between the moon and earth could not support full NTSC, so there was a format conversion between the camera feed and the broadcasters before reaching your set.

The actual film footage, both video and still, that came back was absolutely beautiful. Check out the enlargements at the Rose Center for Earth and Space in the American Museum of Natural History in NYC. Breathtaking.

[AkhenatenII]

I?m sorry. I just can?t excited about this anniversary. First NASA admitted to REUSING original video data tapes of the most important event in modern history. I guess the billions spent wasn?t enough to cover the cost of new tape. Second NASA has to hire Hollywood special effect houses to ?clean up? existing footage with resolutions lower than a World War Two era black and white movie. Third, they release images taken from a lunar probe that will do nothing but stoke the fires of conspiracy nuts who say the whole thing was faked. Images of nothing more than gray specs against a gray background with arrows saying ?here it is the Apollo 11 landing site?. Oh my god it 2009. The military can take a satellite image of the headline of a newspaper your reading from space and NASA can?t even give a a picture that even closely resembles ANYTHING. Ho Hum. ZZZZZZZZZZZZ. I?m bored

[cnet-og]

I guess ignorance is bliss...
Let me enlighten you. Take, e.g., the Hubble telescope: resolution is 0.1 arcseconds. The moon is ~230,000 miles from earth... so, if the Hubble were to look at the moon, it's resolution would be ~600 feet!!! That is, each pixel is 600 feet. Now, imagine trying to image something as small as a lunar landing sight with 600ft resolution. A typical spy satellite has only slightly better resolution (~.05 arcseconds)... so ~300ft resolution.

Do us all a favor and educate yourself before spewing ignorant conspiracy BS.

[zyxxy]

The resolution of the current lunar orbital observatory is 4ft per pixel.
The fact that you can see the worn path between the descent module and the science package is pretty cool.

[AkhenatenII]

Doncha just hate it when editing programs put in question marks instead of quotation marks.... COME ON CNET... just your s**t together. You're suppose to be a high tech site.

[z_black]

"Just your s**t together." Do you mean "just GET your s**t together?" Correcting grammar, then missing a major thing yourself is quite amazing really. Much like my post here.

[SJ2571]

@z_black: The difference is cnet is the published story, so a degree of professionalism is required; whereas user comments are not. Still amazed?

[4score20]

I must have seen some portions of that landing thousands of times over the years but it's still just as thrilling every time. What an accomplishment.

[kenmil01]

The accomplishment was in fooling so many people that it actually happened.

[angela51509]

Hmmm... I just wondered how they possible to restore and back the video where it was already lost... Don't tell me, Pirated was been a fad way back?

hehhee.... im asking!

http://electroluxvacuumcleaners.net

[shoeguy86]

Mymother called me the other day and told me that NASA had lost the tapes and pictures of the first moonwalk. Then she told me that she actually has pictures taken by Buzz Aldren of Neil Armstrong on the moon. These pictures were given to my grandfather by Buzz Aldren when they worked together at NASA. I was shocked. "This is huge" I told her. So her and my aunt are E-mailing NASA to let them know that they have pictures that NASA doesn't. It will be interesting to see how this unfolds.

[hightechfanboy]

I wonder why they didn't fix the waving flag effect. ; )

[Tod Smith]

I find it shocking that we can't re-stage the entire thing on the moon cheaply,

We humans are not as advanced as we think!

I now don't see a Mars landing in our lives.

[SJ2571]

"We humans are not as advanced as we think!" -- so true! While I do believe in a moon landing (they did place a transmitter or such there, as I understand, that third-party scientists can "ping" for want of a better word; thus proving we were there), I do not believe we have the ability to destroy the planet (global warming) and such. Also, I'm 40, and nothing in my lifestyle has changed in the last 40 years in any dramatic way. I still travel by car, eat dinner, go to work, have paper in the office, etc etc etc. No advances. Only gimmicks.

[SEXYDIVERGUY]

Who positioned the wide shot camera? Who is switching between cameras? Does CBS,NBC ,CBC etc not have footage in their archives?The internet has hosted the footage ever since I can remember.

[Chiatzu]

Can't you hoax nutjobs just shut up one day of the year, like on the 40th anniversary of one of mankind's greatest achievements? Leave the day to the people who actually appreciate what happened and what it meant to the world. What a bunch of lost and misguided whiners. Thanks in advance.

[amber0728]

I hate to echo conspiracy theorists but I guess my big question is ... if we did this 40 (FORTY) years ago -AND- we want to go back -AND- we already have a huge space station to use as a base of operations; then why is the idea of returning so difficult and deserving of years additional preparation.

Seriously, I can imagine a 3 to 4 year preparation; but early talk from NASA is that it would take around 15 years. Why so long? Makes you suspect that perhaps some careful satellite launching / dumping was going on in the 60's / 70's with Russia keeping their mouths shut because they likely faked half of their accomplishments too ... I'm just saying ...

Besides, that wacky FOX tv special was borderline silly but there were some key points to ponder; including the images from "different" sites that had a few large stones remain in place from picture to picture ... pretty amazing coincidence. At one point NASA, the geniuses that they are, said they may have 'mistakenly labeled' the pictures; but if that's the case then how do they account for 95% of the non-large stones being moved or different? They say the angles and light cause shadows and tricks; oh well who knows.

Maybe the opposite it true and we've been secretly building a lunar base for the past 25 or 30 years.

[thebrav]

My question is, even though the NASA spokesperson said they envisioned lots of return trips, wouldn't you still want to safeguard the recorded history surrounding the first ever trip to the moon. Seems odd they would accidently erase the original footage especially for this to happen just around the time all of the classification status begins to expire and public domain would have gained access to the original films. hmmm ...

[Michichael]

For you conspiracy theorists, note that reflective prisms were placed on the moon at certain locations. Look these locations up and get a laser transceiver. Point it at a random point on the moon. You won't get anything back. Point it at the coordinates listed? Bingo. Go to any observatory and ask them to do this for you. Or watch the Mythbusters episode.

[Gene2009]

You said:

"It must be noted that anyone who saw Armstrong's moonwalk will remember the images weren't that clear to begin with. TV sets back then didn't offer the sharpest images--at least compared with the picture quality offered today. Moreover, the pictures were transmitted from the moon at 10 frames per second, with 320 lines of resolution for the live telecast."

Also, I wanted to add that I have heard that NASA did not make a video feed available to the networks at the time of the Apollo 11 moon landing, which meant that the images that were broadcast were from video cameras capturing the output of a video monitor. This also certainly didn't enhance the clarity of these iconic images.

[b_baggins]

The conspiracy theory nuts always crack me up. I particularly love the footage where they double-speed the lunar rover video and say: Behold! The lunar rover looks like it's running over hills on earth! The shot is fake.

I reply: Look closer, and note the fine dust being kicked up in perfect parabolas with absolutely no hanging dust motes in the air. I guess the NASA hollywood crowd put the entire sound stage where the hoax was filmed in hard vacuum.