Moonshine

Last weekend I watched Danny Boyle's "Sunshine." I really wish I had seen it in theaters as it's one of the most visually stunning movies I've seen in a long time. It more or less completely falls apart in the third act, but it sure was preety.

The film reminded me of a conversation I had with someone last December about the lunar-landing conspiracy. I floated the idea, which I am by no means particularly attached to, that the landing or at the very least the documentation of such was a hoax. As proof to the contrary I was introduced to "Full Moon," the collection of NASA's master Apollo negatives and transparencies acquired and rescanned by photographer Michael Light in 1999. The resulting prints do arguably offer incontrovertible proof of the mission (would the government spend the time and mind-boggling expense on creating thousands of "production stills," the majority of which had never been previously available to the public? Possibly, yes, but it seems doubtful). It's impossible to look at the photographs and not automatically associate them with the hundreds of sci-fi representations you've seen of the exact same thing. What's more, Light's perception is likely just as informed by "2001" and its ilk as ours is, and the restoration process required many aesthetic choices on the his part:

Because of the scientific and documentary survey nature of the Apollo images, I have been especially careful in my use of powerful digital tools to not alter them beyond what any good printer might do in making a fine exhibition print. Naturally even this required a host of aesthetic decisions for each image -- for which I am solely responsible -- but in each case I let the information on the film lead me, not vice versa. Color was the most demanding challenge. As explained in the book's essays, the physics of human color perception on the Moon are more complex and subjective than on Earth. Film itself adds its own peculiar characteristics to a recorded image, and the type of film used and processing methods also varied from mission to mission. Color accuracy is further complicated by the fact that in the process of duplication, NASA's masters often gained a blue, green, cyan or yellow cast that simply is not present on the original film. My guide has been the fact that lunar soil, when held in the hand on the Moon's surface, appears as lighter and darker shades of gray.

I guess I just find it kind of remarkable that space travel is such a huge concept to wrap one's head around, given the enormity of the cosmos and how rife with possibilities the exploration of it is, and yet the visual lexicon of space travel — both real and fake— has been so incredibly consistent. Which I suppose is partly why some people don't find it credible at all.

Questions of scientific verity aside, these pictures are fascinating and I believe them. You can see twelve of them here.

William Safire - In Case of Moon Disaster
(more info)

Air - Kelly Watch the Stars

The Orb - Little Fluffy Clouds