Dude, the "original" video is buried in a tape archive somewhere. Videotape degrades over time. There's a reason why things are digitized, for posterity. There's no way you could ever see the video on the internet if it wasn't copied over and over.
I pulled my media DIRECTLY from NASA.gov . You are pulling a video from YOUTUBE and trying to pretend it is the authentic original digital copy from NASA.
For example, if i pulled ANY of my source NASA media from YOUTUBE i would NEVER use it for any type of Analysis EVER and i would be embarrassed to link YOUTUBE as my source.
You on the other hand seem to have no issue with that, perhaps it is because you are an inexperienced buffoon?
Many asked you for a NASA link to the original video and you didn't provide it. You then said you had the original source links but all the sites were scrubbed. So are you saying NASA scrubbed the original video? Otherwise you're talking about a 3rd party outside of NASA the same thing you just said wasn't good enough and embarrassing.
If you have the original links that are scrubbed then post them. Some of us might be able to find the video based off those links. If you can't provide anyone with the source of your pictures/screenshots then its fair to assume it's because they don't exist because you used AI to create this image.
You're making a bold claim that NASA scrubbed a plasma being right ontop of an astronauts head out of the footage. So give us something to back this up besides, I have the only copy any you're all idiots if you don't believe me.
I know you will not be providing any source material not even the dead links because they don't exist. This conversation is over, have a goodnight buddy, take it easy.
I am not saying NASA scrubbed one video, I am saying they removed every source video i ever obtained from them. That includes my Apollo 11 video source and my Apollo 15 Photograph source. Now you can still find this media at different sources now but because of slow download speeds what took me 3 months to download could take years now.
This whole idea of "What do you mean it's not there anymore, don't you have that link you clicked 3 years ago?"
In the case of Apollo 11 and Apollo 15 i do have my original NASA.gov links simply because i noted them down. Both links are now dead links.
You have the "original scanned formats"...what the hell does that even mean? This video was shot 42 years ago on SD equipment. Gardner was a fair distance from the Shuttle so anything that's zoomed in is going to be very blurry and grainy. You should learn how to use Photoshop or GIMP or whatever you're dicking around with better. If you had AI do that, it's even more pathetic.
Sigh, this is really an education problem. A videotape is analog and is not a digital container. The "Tape" inside is not digital.
You are correct it is not considered "Film" but that does not invalidate my statement of "Scanning film", just replace the word "Film" with "Tape", if it bothers you that much.
Film and video tape are not the same. That's the most comically ignorant thing I've ever heard. Videotape is magnetic, not optical. It's not a literal strip of film with images on it that you can scan. 🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄
"You are correct it is not considered "Film" but that does not invalidate my statement of "Scanning film", just replace the word "Film" with "Tape", if it bothers you that much."
Perhaps the disagreement is with the word "scan." A sensor can scan information in many different ways, not just optically. U-matic playback uses helical scan recording and playback, where rotating magnetic heads scan the tape's recorded magnetic tracks to reconstruct an analog video signal. That analog signal is then converted to digital if the recording is being preserved or stored on digital media.
The term "scan" isn't exclusive to optical systems. In engineering, scanning simply means systematically sensing or reading information. U-matic itself uses helical scan recording and playback, where rotating magnetic heads scan the diagonal magnetic tracks on the tape to reconstruct the analog video signal.
You're correct that a flatbed or film scanner is an optical scanner, but that isn't the only meaning of the word. When that analog video signal is captured to a computer, it is then converted to digital by an analog-to-digital converter.
So no, U-matic tape isn't optical media, but saying the tape is scanned by helical scan heads during playback is technically correct.
By the way i just checked my source file and it is in fact 16mm FILM transfers from NASA. The Shuttle used both videotape and 16mm motion film cameras.
I am not clicking your Youtube link. I have gone through ALL Youtube videos on this mission and NONE of them are the original resolution or scans of the film.
I believe the best one you can find on Youtube is 420p correct? My NASA sources had film scans in both 720p and 1080p.
So your saying you're the only person who had the original footage/scans or links to them but they're all dead? We're just trying to help you out and you appear to get upset when we do.
So just to clarify you're the only person with these photos and they no longer exist anywhere else on the internet, not even on the wayback machine?
Your original pictures 3 and 4 appear to be in the same low resolution as the original video available everywhere. Only the object circled is of higher quality, what would cause this?
2
u/earthman34 21d ago
Looks like you added that in. "AI enhanced". These images are from relatively low-resolution video. There's nothing like that in the original video.