Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Buzz aldrin posing, nasa artists?

Tags:
  1. Jul 4, 2009 #1
    I've noticed that there are (at least) two kind of photos of the famous Buzz Aldrin posing.

    593px-Aldrin_Apollo_11_original.jpg

    and

    600px-Aldrin_Apollo_11.jpg

    Other one is more gray, and other one has greater contrast with darker boundaries. What's the story behind this difference?

    I don't have a link now, but I recall I once read somewhere that the grayer one is the original. Am I correct to guess, that NASA has some artists whose purpose is to make photos more romantic? And some photos get secondary versions that are supposed to look better?
     
    Last edited: Jul 4, 2009
  2. jcsd
  3. Jul 4, 2009 #2

    Integral

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    I don't think either is the "original" note that the one you wish to call the "original" is a crop of the top image. It has more of the gold thing in the foreground.

    Beyond that what is your point? Is NASA not permitted to make exposure and cropping changes to obtain the optimal photograph?

    Edit: looks like that 2nd image was still loading when I typed up the above, now it appears to have the same content, just better exposure and formatting. Still not a mystery of any sort. Nor are the exposure adjustments extreme.
     
  4. Jul 4, 2009 #3
    (I changed the pictures after the first responders response, so if something doesn't make sense, it could be part of the reason)

    By exposure change you mean the technique where center of the photo is made brighter and boundaries are left darker? I'm already suspecting that this is what has been done, but I'm still interested to know if somebody knows more details about the story of this photo.

    For example, if some photo was released in a year 19xx and then some artist with name XYZ decided that it is too boring, and a second version was released in year 19yy, I'm interested. Nothing more, that's my point.

    btw, I'm probably not the only one who thinks that it is not a good idea to make too dramatic changes to the photos, at least if the viewers are not informed well about this? We all know that now there are, err.., "certain claims" out there about the lightning issues in this photo.
     
    Last edited: Jul 4, 2009
  5. Jul 4, 2009 #4
    Just about every single photograph you see in any publication, anywhere, at any time has been manipulated in some way. In 99.999999999..% of cases this is not done to deceive, but to enhance the clarity of the message. There is no point, need, or requirement that the public should be informed of these changes.
    So you may not think it is a good idea to make such changes, but you had best understand that practically all the visual media you see have been treated in this way.
    Claims which have as much authenticity as finding Winston Churchill's History of the English Speaking People buried in Skarra Brae along with a copy of the Beano. When we allow our normal everyday actions to be dictated to by the lunacy of idiots we might as well all pack up civilisation and head back to the trees.
     
  6. Jul 4, 2009 #5
    Ophiolite, I feel like I've been "channeled" ;)...
     
  7. Jul 4, 2009 #6
    Many people can recognise idiocy when they see it. Only a few are foolish enough to invest time decrying it.:wink:
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: Buzz aldrin posing, nasa artists?
  1. That Buzzing (Replies: 10)

  2. Artistic Depression (Replies: 124)

  3. Mind of an Artist? (Replies: 60)

  4. Dumb from contact buzz (Replies: 10)

Loading...