11–20 of 46 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And best of all, like other works of the US government, it's public domain!
Is it? It's definitely not made immediately clear on their website: https://www.apolloremastered.com/the-project Why are they on flickr and not NASA.gov as usual?
Ha fully expected to read more about the reddit saga.
oh they are finally replacing the reddit backend with their own!? nope it's the moon.
'Oh, you're going to price us all out? You don't care about third party client users? That's fine, I guess you won't care if hundreds of thousands of users suddenly have a client for a different site installed when they go to open reddit.'
I believe all of the new scans are available here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/projectapolloarchive/albums
Those date from 2019, so clearly not. The quality of the few I sampled is also nothing special.
> The quality of the few I sampled is also nothing special.
The ones in the TFA are remastered - color correct among other things. The ones in the Flikr are the unprocessed versions of Apollo Hasselblad photography scanned by NASA's Johnson Space Center. You can download the original 4000x4000+ resolution scans from Flikr.
Every page is filled with these georgeous, highly detailed pictures, and a running commentary from the astronauts or author.
You won't be disappointed.
Wow, they got the Apollo 15 crew to sign these? Awesome! There are some technical / logistical issues with that, but I'm sure they managed to overcome them...
Snark aside, I'm not really sure how running restoration on public domain photographs gives you authorship / copyright ownership over them.
Well it's a thinly veiled ad... and you can't really easily get digital copies - which somehow feels weird/wrong for space stuff. You typically can get that in full resolution directly from NASA. Is the web interface representative of the final quality? Just looking at an example: https://www.apolloremastered.com/shop/p/as15-82-11056-to-110... Even mildly zoomed in the image looks quite crummy and blurry. Fine for a…
The ones in his book are far higher quality. Too bad I can't nail the book to my wall..
Earlier quoted context omitted.
oh they are finally replacing the reddit backend with their own!? nope it's the moon.
I've been very much hoping that Apollo and the rest just pivot to being amazing Lemmy/kbin clients, with multiple instances pre-configured to use. That would be the biggest coup of all. Which is exactly what I thought had happened when I saw a title of "Apollo Remastered". 'Oh, you're going to price us all out? You don't care about third party client users? That's fine, I guess you won't care if hundreds of thousands…
Well it's a thinly veiled ad... and you can't really easily get digital copies - which somehow feels weird/wrong for space stuff. You typically can get that in full resolution directly from NASA. Is the web interface representative of the final quality? Just looking at an example: https://www.apolloremastered.com/shop/p/as15-82-11056-to-110... Even mildly zoomed in the image looks quite crummy and blurry. Fine for a…
Also, I’m pretty sure a lot of the original photos are simply blurry (from motion) or slightly out of focus. Some of the other previews are much sharper.
Check out the beard: https://www.apolloremastered.com/shop/p/as07-04-1596
Luckily photos don’t have to tack sharp to be great. In fact, many awesome photos (on or off planet) aren’t sharp at all. I don’t care at all about the obvious motion blur in this great photo, it even seems fitting: https://www.apolloremastered.com/shop/p/as11-36-5390
(Though I would agree, you picked one that would be greatly helped by being tack sharp and where it being out of focus detracts from it. I still think the composition is great and that’s probably why it made it in.)
What? Since when is a film developer an artist?
If he would've taken the photos himself and then did the post-processing... fine. But not like this.
I'm reading this page: https://www.apolloremastered.com/shop/p/s65-30427 and it doesn't even mention the original photographer.