5 ms·
> After their use, the images were locked away from the public, as at the time they would have revealed the superior technology of the USA’s spy satellite camer
by LiamPa 8y ago
> After their use, the images were locked away from the public, as at the time they would have revealed the superior technology of the USA’s spy satellite cameras, which the orbiters cameras were designed from. Instead the images from that time were grainy and low resolution, made to be so by NASA.
Brilliant!
It states they used 70mm film which according to google is used for motion pictures, I assume a custom camera?
- toomanybeersies 8y agoI'm not certain about the film used for the Lunar Orbiter probes, but the cameras that were used by the Apollo astronauts used 70mm film, rather than the 60mm 120 format that was standard for the Hasselblad cameras they used. The size of the frame is the same, but 70mm film is wider because it has sprocket holes that 120 format film lacks. I would imagine that for the Lunar Orbiter probes they did use a custom camera, and didn't just bolt on an off the shelf camera.
- cromulent 8y agoAccording to this article, Walt Schirra's Hasselblad was the first one in space and after that they were used exclusively for some years. I guess before that they were custom. https://www.hasselblad.com/history/hasselblad-in-space/ https://www.hasselblad.com/history/hasselblad-in-space/
- toomanybeersies 8y agoThe first camera that was brought into space for the Mercury program was a remarkably unremarkable Ansco Autoset rangefinder manufactured by Minolta [1] that was picked up at a drug store, which went up with John Glenn. Of course, Hasselblad didn't put that in their marketing material. Nasa then moved to using Nikon cameras around the Spacelab era, and still uses Nikons to this day. [1] https://history.nasa.gov/apollo_photo.html https://history.nasa.gov/apollo_photo.html
- 4ad 8y agoSo far NASA used Nikon because Nikon didn't use fluorite elements, unlike Canon. However now Nikon started to use fluorite elements as well. I wonder what will happen in the future.
- dpark 8y agoWhy would they avoid fluorite elements?
- blattimwind 8y agoFluorite glass is more sensitive to shock and vibration compared to regular optical glasses. Iirc some people actually managed to disintegrate lens elements here on earth, without even hurling them into space.
- dpark 8y agoI guess that makes sense but is NASA actually shipping off the shelf DSLR lenses to space anyway? I guess for astronauts’ personal devices, whatever. But for actual scientific instruments, I’d expect NASA is bidding out custom contracts that can easily specify how much shock tolerance the cameras must withstand.
- Gibbon1 8y agoWhat I find amazing is a film camera in a hard vacuum. I could be wrong but two things. Designing mechanical things that work in a hard vacuum is difficult. I'm assuming bad things would happen to film in a vacuum. So assuming they were sealed under argon or nitrogen.
- jacobush 8y agoNope.
- jacobush 8y ago"Lubricants had to be chosen with utmost care because of the risk that conventional lubricants could boil off in vacuum and condense all over the optical surfaces of the lens." http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/moon/2.htm http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/moon/2.htm
- Gibbon1 8y agoI do remember the hand held camera's weren't sealed. So film and components needed to be redesigned to work. For instance special anti static film. And mechanical parts made of glass to prevent cold welding. But with Apollo they could take the film back and develop it normally. The orbiters developed film in space and then scanned it. I tried looking and found nothing, but the orbiter camera's developed film using a semi-dry processed using damp ribbons that seem similar to a old typewriter ribbon.
- zaarn 8y agoMechnical things largely work the same. What you do have to pay attention to is that you can't have stuff like flywheels that rely on air to slow them down. Otherwise, a film camera would work the same in vacuum, even if it had some electric components. For the film itself, I don't think you need anything special, there is nothing on the material that would boil off under vacuum to my knowledge. The difficult parts are really heat because unlike in air, any heat you gain is difficult to get rid off again since there is no air to transport it away. So if you do have some electrics in your camera they can easily overheat if not designed for vacuum operation.
- oldcynic 8y agoI would guess a development of Corona, the earliest spy satellites. Those earliest spy satellites were essentially disposable cameras. When full they dropped the film to be caught in mid air by the air force. (A fascinating wiki hole - you may be gone some time) :) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corona_(satellite) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corona_(satellite)
- bookofjoe 8y agoCORONA Digital Atlas of the Middle East: http://corona.cast.uark.edu/atlas#zoom=5¢er=4700000,3600000 http://corona.cast.uark.edu/atlas#zoom=5¢er=4700000,3600...