Citizen science: restoring the first 'Earthrise' image ever taken – help needed for The Lunar Orbiter Image Recovery Project

Note: WUWT readers may remember Dennis Wingo, who was one of the lead scientists on recovering use of the ISEE spacecraft. Before that, he started on a project to recover and restore old 2 inch “quad” Ampex video tape recordings from the Lunar Orbiter, sent in 1966 to map out landing sites for the Apollo moon landings. The Earthrise image is the first image ever taken of the Earth from the orbit of the Moon.  It was taken on August 23rd 1966 at an altitude of 1100 km over the lunar surface.

lunar-orbiter-earthriseIt was taken by the high resolution camera on the spacecraft and transmitted back to the Earth.  It predates the color picture (below) from Apollo 8 by over two years. The before and after image (above) shows how the image has been reconstructed and corrected, and a fully restored high resolution image has now been made available for prints.

Apollo 8, the first manned mission to the moon, entered lunar orbit on Christmas Eve, Dec. 24, 1968. That evening, the astronauts-Commander Frank Borman, Command Module Pilot Jim Lovell, and Lunar Module Pilot William Anders-held a live broadcast from lunar orbit, in which they showed pictures of the Earth and moon as seen from their spacecraft. Said Lovell, “The vast loneliness is awe-inspiring and it makes you realize just what you have back there on Earth.” They ended the broadcast with the crew taking turns reading from the book of Genesis.

I’m putting the power of WUWT readers behind this worthy project to recover science history.

To Donate to the Project Please go to:

Thank you for your consideration – Anthony Watts

Guest essay by Dennis Wingo

The Lunar Orbiter Image Recovery Project

The Lunar Orbiter Image Recovery Project (LOIRP) is a public/private project to recover, from the original master tapes, the image data from the five spacecraft NASA sent to the moon in the 1960’s and provide it to the scientific community and the public.  The first is done through a peer review process and then the data is provided to the National Space Science Data Center (NSSDC) for archiving.  We also have a public website through NASA at the Solar System Exploration Research Virtual Institute (SSERVI) at the NASA Ames Research Center.  This missive is to explain the background of the mission, the character of the data, and why it is important to our scientific and national history.

At this time we have completed over 90% of the work necessary to archive and publish these images.  However, sometimes that last 10% is the hardest and we have in the dozens of terabytes of data to complete the processing of our image captures.  Why doesn’t NASA pay for this?  They have paid for the vast majority of our work.  NASA’s Space Science Mission Directorate, NASA Ames, and and SSERVI have been magnificent in support of our work.  However, NASA’s budget is severely constrained, and for legacy projects like this, it is our work in technoarchaeology (literally the archaeology of technology) that is saving this data for posterity.

When we started this project, it was only to save the images of Lunar Orbiter’s II and III.  However, in 2011 NASA asked us how much it would cost to complete all five orbiters.  We estimated $400,000.  NASA provided $300,000 of this, leaving a gap of $100,000.  This is why we ask for your support in our crowdfunding effort, to complete this task.  These images, provided on the SSERVI website, will be free to the public with no copyright.  The American taxpayer paid for this effort and even though our company has also contributed materially to the effort and we are extending this through your generous donations through crowdfunding, we want this to be provided free of charge, or any intellectual property right restrictions.

NASA had stored these original analog data tapes for over four decades, but if it were not for our project and former NASA archivist Nancy Evan’s preservation of the tape drives in her barn, this archive at its best quality would be lost to history.  Following is a description of the Lunar Orbiters, their camera, the images and what we are doing to preserve this legacy of the early Apollo program.

Background on the Lunar Orbiter

In 1966-67 NASA sent five spacecraft to the Moon to do a high resolution photo reconnaissance of the surface in preparation for the manned Apollo lunar landings.  This was the first time in human history, other than a few closeups before impact from the Ranger spacecraft, that the moon had been seen up close and personal.  The Lunar Orbiter spacecraft is shown schematically in figure 1:

Figure 1: Details of the Lunar Orbiter Spacecraft

The Lunar Orbiters were simple spacecraft compared today, but still quite capable.  Since this was the 1960’s there were no megapixel class CCD’s like on a camera phone to take images.  The Lunar Orbiters each carried ~3600 feet of SO-243 70mm black and white film.  The camera was built by Eastman Kodak, and had heritage from the classified SAMOS program.  There were two lens systems for the camera, one with a 80mm focal length Schneider-Xenotar lens with the other being a 610mm focal length lens from Pacific Optical.  The camera and imaging system is shown in figure 2:

Figure 2: Lunar Orbiter Imaging System

Figure 3 shows the overall process of the image capture, film processing, transmission, reception, reassembly and storage of the images:

Figure 5: End to End Lunar Orbiter Image Path

This graphic details the film system and shows how the images are scanned from the film.  Scanning is accomplished with a light beam that shines through the film an is then detected by a photomultiplier tube, (the great grandfather of the imager in your smart phone) where it was turned into a radio signal and beamed to the Earth.  Upon reception at the three ground stations, (Woomera in Australia, Madrid in Spain, and Goldstone in California) the images went two directions.  First, and most importantly for the LOIRP project, the images were recorded straight off the receiver to magnetic tape, shown in the lower left.  The tapes were recorded in what is known as “pre-detection” format.  This is the same as if you just captured a WiFi signal and stripped the waveform of the data out of it, without knowing what was in it.  This form of recording has the most fidelity to the original data, and is key to the reason for having the LOIRP project in the first place.

The second path was that the image analog waveforms were demodulated and displayed to a kinescope.  A kinescope is a very specific kind of display tube that displays the images on a screen in a manner similar to an old fashioned glass television tube.  This is where the principal loss of dynamic range occurs as will be detailed in the next section.  The images were then recorded on 35mm film.  The negative for this was actually a photographic positive (because the scanned 70mm film is a negative as well).  The film was then cut into strips called “framelets” which were assembled and placed under a large format camera.  The resulting negative from that process was used to assemble a large format photographic print.  We have many of these, which are provided as perks for the LOIRP crowdfunding.  One of those is shown here in figure 4:

Figure 4: Lunar Orbiter Original Kodak Print Image

The striping comes from the framelets and how they are put together.  The above is a Lunar Orbiter V medium resolution image.  It is comprised of 28 framelets stitched together in the assembly process described above then processed to a large sized photographic print.  It is these historic images that we are offering as the perks for the LOIRP last mile campaign.  The above image is approximately 20″ x 24″ and is offered as the $250 perk. (note the images will have different locations on the Moon on them, not just what is pictured above).

Detail of the Lunar Orbiter Film Images 

The images from the 70mm film on the spacecraft were processed shortly after they were taken by a dry “bi-mat” process, similar to an old polaroid camera where you took a picture, spit out the film, and then it processed it in 60 seconds and you pulled it apart.  Well, except that this was super high quality (500 lines per mm ) 70mm black and white negative film.  This is described in the book on the SAMOS camera, developed in the 1950’s by the U.S. Air Force, transferred to the National Reconnaissance Organization and then transferred to NASA for Lunar Orbiter.

Figure 5 shows the detail regarding the film format, and size of each image in kilometers, assuming a 45 kilometer lunar perigee orbit for the high resolution and medium resolution images:

Figure 3: Lunar Orbiter Film Forma

The upper right part of figure 5 is of supreme importance to our project.  NASA wanted to be able to guarantee that after the image was scanned, it could be properly reassembled.  Also, they wanted to be able to do a quality check on the images.  The upper right has what is called “edge data.”  This edge data was a part of the film that was preexposed on the Earth to produce a set of test patterns as well as a counter so that NASA would know how to reassemble the film.  An explanation of the patterns in the edge data strip, along with one captured by our team during our early test digitization process is shown in figure 6:

Figure 4: Edge Data Strip with LOIRP Captured Data

Figure 6 is an optical industry standard chart for determining the quality of a photographic image.  The linearity pattern allows for accurate reconstruction of the size of the individual strips of image as they are scanned.  The right side of figure 4 is from our LOIRP digitization, to show the quality of our captured images.  The resolution charts are just that, they tell you the resolution of the images.  The accurate reconstruction of the edge data provides verification that the scanned and transmitted image has been properly reconstructed and that the image of the Moon is in focus and meets resolution requirements.

The key for the LOIRP project is the gray scale step chart.  This gray scale chart is in ten steps, which then gives a measure of the dynamic range of the image.  Dynamic range is the same as how many bits you have.  On board the spacecraft, the SO-243 film as a dynamic range of ~1000 to 1.  in computer terms this is equivalent to 10 bits.  Some images will not have this dynamic range due to the uniform nature of the lunar surface. It is most important where there is shadowing and indirect light, which was required for many images in order to determine surface slope angles and small crater depths.  The Lunar Orbiter images were key to finding the landing sites for the early Apollo missions and for other science related work on the ground.  Following describes some of the research done with the images.

Use of the Lunar Orbiter Images in the 1960’s to 1990’s

Since there was only a limited amount of film that could be placed on the spacecraft, NASA had to send five of them to the Moon in order to accomplish all of their mission requirements.  The principle requirement was to map the moon at high resolution in the equatorial region, which is where the first Apollo missions landed.   Figure 7 shows the principal areas that were imaged:

Figure 7: Locations filmed at Medium and High Resolution on the Lunar Near Side

Some of the odd shaped areas are from oblique images taken by the spacecraft when it was tilted.  The high resolution images were used to determine the number of small craters, the slope angles of the surface (flat or mountainous regions) and the number of rocks.  Before these images, no one in all of human history knew what the surface of the Moon looked like in detail over large areas.  The highest resolution images were taken in the equatorial region because that is where the Apollo missions were going to land crews:  Figure 8 is one of our LOIRP images that is blown up to show the Apollo 14 landing site, along with an inset of a picture taken on the surface:

Figure 8: Apollo 14 Landing Site (Pre with Overlay) Lunar Orbiter

After the site selection for Apollo 11, 12, and 14, the Apollo Service Module SIM bay camera images were used to pick the sites for Apollo 15-17.  The Lunar Orbiter images were the sole source for decades (until the Clementine Mission by the Strategic Defense Initiative Organization).  Even with missions by other nations, the resolution of the lunar orbiter images were not exceeded until the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) mission by NASA that is in orbit today around the Moon (2014).

In 1965 a memo was sent by Charlie Byrne (who has worked with us on the LOIRP project) regarding the justification for the purchase of the tape recorders and the value of the tapes.  This memo, linked here, gives four principle reasons for the creation of the tapes:

  1. No new hardware be developed to rapidly convert the data to digital form for computer analysis.
  2. Predetection tape recorded data is free from degradation by the ground detection and ground photographic recording equipment.
  3. The tape may be replayed through the ground recording equipment with parameters optimized for particular condition of the data.
  4. Tape recorded data is useful in end-to-end calibration of the system.

The Lunar Orbiter tapes were used in the 1960’s for computer digitization.  The largest supercomputer in the world at the time was a Univac 1170, with 256 kilobytes of RAM.  NASA ran the tapes in a very similar manner to the LOIRP project, but with the much more primitive digitizer chips of the era.  They did this to run computer analyses of the images to determine the height of rocks around the potential landing sites.  They also used computer programs (project slope no less) to determine the slope of the surface for the potential landing sites.  No rocks larger than a meter could be tolerated due to potential damage to the Lunar lander legs.  Also, there was an Apollo mission requirement that no slope angle be greater than 14 degrees or the Lunar lander could tip over on landing.  Both of these analyses required the tape data for maximum fidelity.

Beyond its value to the Apollo human exploration program, the science that has been done with Lunar Orbiter images runs into the several hundred peer reviewed papers.  Lunar Orbiters I,II, and III were in the low inclination orbits best suited for the photo reconnaissance task for the Apollo missions.  Lunar Orbiter IV and  V were in polar orbits.  Lunar Orbiter IV was in a 2,706 x 6,111 km orbit, giving high resolution images at 40-140 resolution and medium resolution images at 200-1000 meters.     Lunar Orbiter V’s orbit was 194.5 x 6,023 km, providing images with 2 meters best resolution on the near side of the Moon.  The Moon was the first body in the solar system completely mapped (98%).  Even the Earth was not completely mapped from space until the Landsat era of the 1970s.

Film Scans of Lunar Orbiter Images and Other Associated Data

The best site on the Internet for lunar orbiter images has always been the Lunar and Planetary Laboratory in Houston (  That is the go to site that I use almost every day when looking at comparable lunar images when doing work on LOIRP.  Another good site, though only for Lunar Orbiter’s 3, 4, and 5 is the Planetary Data Node at the U.S. Geological Survey in Flagstaff.  However, at both sites, all of these images are from scans of the film (called the GRE film for Ground Reconstruction Electronics) described above related to figure 3.[1]

The U.S. Geological survey scanned the film with an 8 bit scanner, providing a dynamic range of 255 to one.  This is consistent with what we know of the dynamic range of the GRE film.  However, as stated above, the 70mm SO-243 film on board the spacecraft had a 1000 to 1 or ten bit dynamic range.  This is shown in figure 9, which describes the film density of the gray scale chart shown in figure 6:

Figure 9: Lunar Orbiter Gray Scale Chart and 70mm SO-243 Film Transfer Function

The charts above were what I first ran into in the late 1980’s after obtaining a set of Lunar Orbiter microfilm prints and this is what led to my interest in recovering the original images from the tape.  If you look to the top right where it calls out the film density from the Gray Step chart, you will see the legend “Reassembled Record Density Change“.  This is the reproduced density of the GRE film which correlates to the Grays in the step chart seen in figure 6 right.  Thus it can be determined that Gray Step 1, possibly 2, and 8, as well as step 9 are clipped, or eliminated in the GRE film that was used by the USGS and everyone else after the use of the Lunar Orbiter tapes ended during the Apollo era.  This effectively clipped the data from 10 bits to 8 bits.  This is a compression of the dynamic range by a factor of four.  Also, the lower graph, with an overlay of video from an oscilloscope, is a single line scanned across the Gray Step chart, showing that the video signal matched the transfer function of the SO-243 film.  Interestingly, we could optimize this transfer function in either electronically in the demodulator or in software in post processing.

In the late 1980’s before I was a college student, I was an engineer in a television studio that used tape drives similar to the ones used for the Lunar Orbiter tapes.  When I did my research during my college years studying the moon, I found that the tapes did indeed exist and that someone was trying to digitize the images.  However, years later I found out that this had not been the case, thus the LOIRP project was born.


Rather than regurgitate extensively the history of the LOIRP project (please see the links at the end of this article for documentaries and papers and posters that we have done), I will summarize and then describe why we are asking for the public’s hard earned money to complete the project.

When we started the project, we had three fundamental questions to answer:

1. Can 40+ year old Ampex FR-900 Instrumentation Tape Drives be brought back to an operating condition?

2. Is there any data on the tapes?

3. If there is data on the tapes, is it of higher quality than what is available in the existing archives.

We definitively answered all three questions in the affirmative in our previous efforts and as described in this missive and in the referenced paper.[2]  Visually, the difference in dynamic range can be immediately apparent, especially in images with a lot of light and dark (which corresponds to a wide dynamic range).

In November of 2008, after six months of work we reintroduced Lunar Orbiter to the world.  Figure 10 is an example of the improvement in a Lunar Orbiter 1 famous image, which is the first Image of the Earth, taken from around the Moon:

Figure 10: LO-1_102H Image 1966 (above) and 2008 (below)

Digital capture of the original analog tape at the individual scan line level and at the full dynamic range of the 70mm film allows us to recover far more of the original data than from other sources. We were even able (with an artist’s help) above to remove the bimat dryout line to the right of the earth.  Figure 11 is a blow up of the earth, impossible to obtain from the film:

Figure blah blah

For artistic purposes NASA flipped this over on its side, but here we reproduce it in its proper orientation. You can see the north coast of Africa, the Mediterranean sea, and Sicily and Spain in the upper part of the image.  You can also see the coast of South America to the far left, with a fog bank hugging the coast.  At the bottom you can see the Antarctic ice pack at that date, August 23, 1966.  The cloud formations are clearly visible, down to about what we estimate is a five kilometer resolution.  You can even see the sun glinting off the the Atlantic ocean, something that exoplanet hunters have talked about using as a means to detect oceans on exoplanets.  This is with what would today be a very modest telescope.   Figure 12 also shows the effect of improved dynamic range in a high contrast oblique image of the Lunar surface:

Figure 12: Copernicus Central Uplift Comparison (Image LOII-162-H3)

These are good details from images.  However, we have a poster from a NASA conference that we call our money chart.  The full sized chart is linked here, but a reduced version of that is shown here in figure 13:

Figure 13: NASA Lunar Science Institute Conference 2012 Chart on Relative Quality of Film vs Tape vs LROC Image Of Copernicus Central Uplift

Please download the chart at the link to get the full feel but it can easily be see how the improved dynamic range and our ability to easily do software processing to remove the striping artifacts makes the Lunar Orbiter image fully comparable to the current Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter’s (LRO) LROC camera image of the same area under similar lighting conditions.  Thus we establish the value of our work for using the digitized Lunar Orbiter images from tape as a scientific baseline from the 1960’s fully comparable to any future work at this high resolution.  No other spacecraft from the 1960’s until the LRO mission achieved this level of resolution of the lunar surface.

Where We Are Today

We have been very fortunate to get as far as we have.  Our original NASA sponsored work was to digitize Lunar Orbiter II and III as a compliment to the work of the USGS.  Lunar Orbiter I only has a few high resolution images as a result of the failure of the image motion compensation system.  However, in 2013, thanks to an earlier crowd funded effort, NASA gained confidence that we could complete the digitization of all of the Lunar Orbiter images.  We were also fortunate to have one of the Ampex old engineers (Ken Zin and Al Sturm) and all of his friends and associates who knew how to put the tape drives together.  We have also have had exceptional support from NASA Ames, headquarters, and the science community. For us the LOIRP project has been a labor of love for the community for which we are a part, and to provide them to the public, that paid for them.

In late 2013 we completed the scan of all the images on the 1478 tapes in our possession.  We were able to recover more than 98% of the images on the tapes, a remarkable testimony to the engineers of the 1960’s and their care for the tapes.  Figure 14 shows how the images were scanned from the 70mm film and how we saw them during our playback of the tapes:

Figure 12: Lunar Orbiter Film Scanning and Framelet Construction

If you look above on figure 14 you will see that the light beam (reference above in figure 3), scanned through the film, producing a change in current in the photomultiplier tube.  This is what you see in the individual line near the bottom of figure 12:  Other components are superimposed on the line, such as the synchronization pulse (vertical sync pulse for those in the television field).  An additional “spike” near the beginning and end of each line is also added.  This is the “stitching” that can be seen when you blow an unprocessed Lunar Orbiter image up (you can see the stitching on the right side of figure 6 in the middle of the calibration section running horizontally).  The reason for the stitching is to aid in the reassembly of the image.  There is a tiny (0.05″) overlap between the framelets (which is what one scan across the film as seen to the left and middle top is defined as).  This overlap was theoretically back then to allow a machine to reassemble the images for further processing.  The overlap is ideally eliminated in post processing of the digital images.  Figure 15 shows in summary how we do our work:

Figure 15: LOIRP Image Assembly Production Flow

This process was originally manual, but with our engineer Austin Epps and software from Lunar Orbiter veteran Charlie Byrne (the same one from the 1965 memo), we have been able to automate this process.

What the Crowd Funding Will Pay to Do

We are over 90% of the way through our total process.  All of the tapes have been captured.  We are about to donate the refurbished tape drives and the demodulator to the Library of Congress. The Library is the repository of the knowledge of the American people and we feel that this is the best long term home for the tape drives.

The tasks that we have to finished and still have to do are as follows.

  1. Tape Capture

The tape capture of all of the tapes and all of our Lunar Orbiter Images is complete.

2. Framelet Slicing

This is where all of the framelets, captured on the tapes, are “sliced” or separated into individual files.  This task is also completed.

3. Framelet File Naming

This task takes the approximately 107,000 framelet files and names them with the proper lunar orbiter and image and framelet number.  Approximately 97,000 of these are done and about 10,000 to go.  This is the major task to be completed that will allow us to fill in the data that is needed for most of the submittal to the planetary data system.

4. Framelet Image Processing

This task is to take and run a batch program that takes the framelets and runs an image processing program on them to remove the “W” pattern, which is an artifact from the scanning of the 70mm film on the spacecraft.  This basically averages the gray scaled framelets and some other minor processing.  This is the first step in creating the finished .tiff large images for the SSERVI website.  This is a mostly automated process but sometimes it crashes due to defects in the capture, defects on the tapes, and when this happens, which is for a certain percentage, then it has to be done manually, taking a lot of time. This task is about 40-50% complete and has to be run on all 107,000 framelet files.

5. Framelet Assembly Into Images

We have to take the processed framelets and assemble them into images.  Thanks to Austin Epps scripting wizardry this is also a mostly automated process but has the same tendency to crash for a minority of files, which have to be manually done.  This task is also about 40-50% complete.

6. Final Processing

The assembled images then go through a final round of image processing as a complete or mostly complete image.  Some of the images are not complete from the spacecraft and some are not complete because of a defect in the tape.  We have done as much as we reasonably can to capture all the framelets correctly.  We have over a 98% completion rate, which is remarkable for something this old.  We also have images that are not in the current NASA database at either LPI or the USGS.  These will be published as well and we hope that with your support we can go ahead now and start this process.  These images will show up on the NASA SSERVI website as they are completed. They are also going to the NASA Planetary Data Center for archiving and preservation.  We are also at about 40-50% complete on this task.

7. Paperwork

For all of this there is a lot of paperwork.  We have myself, Austin, Marco, and some students to help, but for a project of this size, this is a labor intensive task.  We are developing the link between the raw images and the completed .tiff files.  It is vitally important to save the raw data as image processing technology advances rapidly and it will almost certainly be the case that future researchers will improve on our work in assembling images that can be better correlated to modern images.  We are also doing the submittal to the Planetary Data System (PDS) and this requires a lot of work, back and forth with a peer review committee and eventual disposition to the PDS of all of our work.  This includes the public website data that we will put out there so that the public can also play with our images and know what the, as we call it in the business, the traceability is to the raw images.  In science having the raw data is crucially important to establish scientific provenance.

This task is already underway now but much has to be done.

So the above tasks are what we need your generous donations for.  Watch our progress even before the end of the crowd funding effort so that you know that your hard earned dollars are being well spent!

To Donate to the Project Please go to:




Documentaries and Interviews and Web Pages

Our Wikipedia Page

Documentary on LOIRP by Scott Manley of the Kerball Space Program!

A 1960’s NASA Documentary on Lunar Orbiter and its importance to the Apollo landings TV Museum of Art Short on Lunar Orbiter Image Recovery Project Amnesia, a Dutch Documentary About Losing our Digital Heritage, Featuring the Lunar Orbiter Image Recovery Project.

Spacevidcast interview about the LOIRP project and lunar exploration and development.

Our Old Website


[1] L. Gaddis, T. Becker, L. Weller, D. Cook, J. Richie, A. Bennett, B. Redding and J. Shinaman, REVIVING LUNAR ORBITER: SCANNING, ARCHIVING, AND CARTOGRAPHIC PROCESSING AT USGS, Astrogeol- ogy Team, U.S. Geological Survey, 2255 N. Gemini Drive, Flagstaff, AZ

[2] D. R. Wingo1 and C. J. Byrne2, 1, ANALYSIS OF LUNAR ORBITER IMAGES RECOVERED FROM ANALOG TAPE Skycorp Incorporated, P.O. Box 375 Moffett Field, CA, Image Again,

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
March 12, 2015 10:36 am

Thanks Anthony for this.
I also propose an experiment. We can do an AMA (Ask me Anything), like Reddit here.
It will go all day today and tomorrow.
Thanks, and thanks for the support of the WUWT community!

Pat Frank
Reply to  denniswingo
March 12, 2015 2:45 pm

All hail to you, Dennis. It’s a work of pure altruism and reverence for history. The future will be enriched because of you.
Also, I’m proud of NASA for having supported your work, and for suggesting that your initial recovery project be expanded to all five orbiters. This is the great NASA of record.
Let us all know here if/when you reach the $ 100k you need.

March 12, 2015 10:38 am

Donated via PayPal

Larry Sheldon
March 12, 2015 10:57 am

Amazing stuff–and some of it looks so “Rube Goldberg” now.

Bill Wagstick
March 12, 2015 11:07 am

I hope in the near future Citizen science will be seeking funding to restore the original temperature records!

March 12, 2015 11:17 am

I guess Bill Anders had the easiest job on Apollo 8, as Lunar Module Pilot, seeing that Apollo 8 didn’t have a lunar module !

March 12, 2015 11:46 am

Why don’t they just go back to the Hollywood studio where they staged the whole thing in first place. Lol.
Incredible shots, worthwhile project. Just think now Apollo 11’s autopilot functions for what they were then probably could be accomplished with a smart phone or a laptop.

Joel O’Bryan
Reply to  logos_wrench
March 12, 2015 12:13 pm

It wasn’t in Hollywood. They were all staged in a large hanger out at Nevada’s Area 51 where the UFO’s and dead (space) aliens are kept. (more LOL, and pseudo-fodder for Lewandowski-like mendacity on the left.)

Reply to  logos_wrench
March 12, 2015 3:00 pm

My guess is a watch – not even the recently announced crab-a**le timepiece, just a cheap imitation. Smart phones are wa-a-ay over the top for what was available nearly half a century ago.
Apollo 8 was in 1968 – that’s better than forty-five years ago.
They did some gorgeous [postage] stamps for that, and the spacewalks. I think I’ve still got some . . . .

Joel O’Bryan
March 12, 2015 12:06 pm

Just my destructive curiosity, but it would be cool to see a before and after of an Apollo lunar service module impact site. Did any occur in a LOIRP acquired hi-res image to do a before and after comparison?
The 4 known LSM impact sites (Apollo’s 12, 14, 15,17) are listed here:
Maybe a computer image search of the before and after possible impact areas could locate the other two (Apollo’s 11 and 16)?

Reply to  Joel O’Bryan
March 12, 2015 1:01 pm

I don’t think any of these spacecraft flew that late in the program. Apollo 12 was up in November of ’69. You’d have to get the “after” images from the currently orbiting LRO mission. I guess there is a possibility that the SIM bay cameras on Apollo 15 or 17 referenced in this article picked up those 12 and 14 sites as well.

Joel O’Bryan
Reply to  NielsZoo
March 12, 2015 2:19 pm

The LOIRP would provide the Before LSM impact. After could come from any of several different missions which sufficient resolution.
I know there are modern images of several Apollo landing sites where the lunar rover tracks and some foot tracks can be seen for low orbit pictures..An LSM impact site would be a small splat.

Reply to  Joel O’Bryan
March 12, 2015 2:30 pm

We have the before images of the Apollo 11, 12, and 14 landing sites. NilesZoo is right in that they flew in 1966-67, too early for the lunar landers. They were specifically sent to map to find the landing sites.

March 12, 2015 12:14 pm

All that money and they didn’t use a color camera for the originals. That’s like milk crates for seats in a Bentley.

Reply to  RWturner
March 12, 2015 12:36 pm

It wasn’t technically feasible at the time. The SO-243 film used was insanely high resolution stuff. I don’t think they could have built in the proper processing for VNF and the loss of resolution would have been extreme. It would then have had to be converted to three separate records and still transmitted in black and white with over triple the comm bandwidth. The additional hardware (significant) and far poorer resolution (also significant) would not have produced images with the required amount of data to do the job of landing site selection or decent mapping. Color photos of the lunar landscape would have been a massive wasted effort. Imaging wise this was the absolute best choice.

Reply to  NielsZoo
March 12, 2015 12:57 pm

Fair enough. The resolution is remarkable.

Reply to  NielsZoo
March 12, 2015 2:32 pm

Niels is right about this one as well. The 70mm film has a resolution of 500 lines per millimeter, insane as it were. The purpose of the Lunar Orbiter missions was photoreconnaissance, not science. Science was an afterthought after its principal mission was complete.

Reply to  NielsZoo
March 12, 2015 3:37 pm

Plus super high resolution would have exoosed the seams and nail holes in the wooden backdrop. Lol.

Crispin in Waterloo
Reply to  NielsZoo
March 12, 2015 4:14 pm

That resolution is amazing. IMAX, challenged to build the world’s largest projected image for the 1970 World’s Fair, took a different tack: They turned the film 90 degrees and used 15 sprocket holes per frame to increase the image size, using the available 55mm as the height, not width of the image. It chows film but the resolution is amazing.
IMAX was based at the time in what is now Cambridge, Ontario. Just up the road in Waterloo is Teledyne DALSA which is now making 300 megapixel CCD’s for ‘similar applications’. Their products is on the Mars Rover.
To give you an idea of the spectral sensitivity of modern CCD’s another local company produced a 3-D image with 1 cm resolution of a downed aircraft covered by three layers and 40 years of jungle canopy, taken from 10,000′ through the canopy.
I conclude from that example that in future the resolution and detail available from the recovered images may by enhanced by as yet-unknown or unpublished techniques for digital image processing. Preserve the past for the future.

Reply to  RWturner
March 12, 2015 1:03 pm

There is absolutely nothing wrong with photography in the black and white medium. In fact in some cases, as seems to be the case with these missions, it’s better. Sorry, would love to make a donation but I am seriously broke.
Dennis, will we see an update to the other mission you are involved with?

Reply to  Patrick
March 12, 2015 2:33 pm

Patrick, absolutely, if you will send me an email (, I will send you something cool.

Reply to  Patrick
March 12, 2015 9:29 pm

Kewl! Thank you Dennis, email sent from my, now, very old account.

Reply to  Patrick
March 12, 2015 11:28 pm

Dennis, I get a postmaster faiure on that address.

Reply to  Patrick
March 13, 2015 9:18 am

Bloody damned spell correct changed the address!

Reply to  RWturner
March 12, 2015 2:52 pm

Why go thru the trouble and expense of using color imagery when the subject is all grey scale. Unless I’m missing the lush moon foliage and vast oceans. To add extra equipment would also add weight to the spacecraft, which would effect the launch, etc. Having the Earth Rise image is just the icing on the cake. With higher resolution B&W imagery, it would be easy to colorize the earth to make a higher impact, if that’s what one wants. But I would equate that to colorizing “It’s a Wonderful Life”, just not necessary.
As for the imagery, there was a series of spy satellites named Hexagon (KH-# for Key Hole),
These actually took film footage and jettisoned a pod with the film. The pod (4 per satellite) entered the atmosphere and it’s parachute would be caught by an airplane with a grappling hook. I worked for the company that use to be called Perkin-Elmer, where they were built. I actually still work with people who worked on these top secret projects (along with the Hubble). Cool stuff.

Reply to  RWturner
March 12, 2015 4:22 pm

Not a whole lot of color on the moon. The surface reflects all visible wavelengths about the same, just like a grey card. The images wouldn’t have been much different.

March 12, 2015 12:24 pm

A very interesting project. Dennis Wingo’s zest for recovery of old space stuff is amazing and insperational.
I’m shocked at the complexity of the video stream!. I bet that camera system is an engineering marvel
I’m wondering what the equivalent pixel density of the film is? The text hints at 500 lines per mm, but that makes a 70mm x 70mm frame over 1.2 billion pixels? (worth way more that a thousand words)
BTW, the SAMOS program link is dead.
“In science having the raw data is crucially important to establish scientific provenance.”
Wow, who knew? Maybe we should spread the word…

Reply to  Paul
March 12, 2015 1:49 pm

I don’t remember it having an MTF in the range of 500 lp/mm but I can’t find a data sheet. The “lines” resolution given for film means line pairs. A “line” is one white and one black line so an MTF, or modulation transfer function, of 500 lines would represent 1,000 lines alternating black and white. Resolving that from film to digital requires at least 4 times over the number of lines for the pixel width to allow for the 45 degree skew aliasing. (That regular grid thing really screws up diagonal resolution.) That means to properly digitize a single square millimeter of a 500 lp/mm frame would require at least 16 million pixels. The usual image area width used for double perforated 70mm film was almost 50mm so you’d need 800,000,000 pixels per linear millimeter of film if you didn’t want to lose too much.
That said, I seem to remember the resolution of most of the aerial films were closer to 200 lp/mm with grain sizes in the 0.1µm range. That would only require about 128,000,000 pixels per linear mm… but it’s been almost 30 years since I did any high resolution film work so I could very easily be wrong on the resolutions. As a comparison most standard movie films were in the 120 lp/mm range.

Reply to  NielsZoo
March 12, 2015 2:41 pm

Niels is right on the money again. The Lunar Orbiters were down-resed a bit to about 200 lines/mm in practice. The line spot for the film scanner on the spacecraft was 5 microns.
A couple of factoids.
One video line is about 1205 microseconds. We sample at 5 MHz, or one sample every 200 nanoseconds. That is 5,025 samples per line. There are 17,400 lines per framelet. That is 87,435,000 samples per framelet. There are 98 framelets per high resolution image. That equals 8,568,630,000 samples. Each sample is 16 bits. So its about 17 gigabytes per raw high res frame.
There are approximately 1100 high resolution images. That is about 18 terabytes just for the high res images and about 1/3rd that or another 6 terabytes for the medium resolution images. Follow the links to the NASA SSERVI LOIRP website for the finished tiff images. A high res is about 2.2 gigabytes and a medium res is about 785 megabytes.
Now you see the scale of our data problem.

Reply to  NielsZoo
March 14, 2015 6:03 am

Yes, that is a significant data volume problem. But WOW! What a problem!

March 12, 2015 12:47 pm

In a time and day before transistors, many great things were accomplished. This is an important and noble project. So too is recovering and storing digital data on old floppy disks and tapes used on Burroughs and IBM readers that won’t last too much longer. Not to mention we live in a time when just one nasty solar flare could erase so much. I applaud the effort. Maybe a side bar icon as a reminder and quick link to newbies at his site could be added less we forget.

March 12, 2015 1:25 pm

are these vertical lines retouched with something like iterating through an array of pixels ?

Reply to  zemlik
March 12, 2015 3:05 pm

Sent via Payapl.

Reply to  zemlik
March 12, 2015 7:03 pm

Zemlik, we have used all custom algorithms, some done by the original scientists, who are working with us. That is interesting though!

March 12, 2015 3:46 pm

Dennis, what a great project, impressive results so far.
My first job out of college was with Eastman Kodak and my department head was the PM (Program Manager) for the Kodak design and construction efforts for these instruments. Fascinating technology involved.
Did you know that the International Museum of Photography and Film at the George Eastman House in Rochester NY has one of these cameras and associated film development hardware in their collection ? It was an engineering model that was used to test/debug the units. It was on public display a few years ago, I do not think it currently is.
The Samos reconnaissance satellites used the same technology (known as film readout), but the satellites that ejected the film in a “bucket” (known as direct return) for retrieval by an aircraft over the Pacific had higher performance so the Samos satellites did not last long. The “Corona”, “Gambit” and “Hexagon” film return satellites have an important place in World history as well. With real data about the extent of the USSR’s nuclear arsenal US leaders could set the appropriate level of defense spending. And these satellites allowed successful negotiation of the arms control treaties. Remember “Trust but Verify”, these satellites enabled the”verify” part of the equation. Part of the treaties required that dismantled ICBMs and Bombers be cut into pieces and laid out in an open field for several months so the satellites could take images from overhead of “denied territory”. These are known as “National Technical Means”, or NTM in the treaties.
Of course it is very difficult to retrieve a film bucket ejected from a satellite orbiting the Moon so they had to use the film readout method.
Great project, best of luck.
Cheers, KevinK.

Reply to  KevinK
March 12, 2015 7:05 pm

Cool. Yea, from what I read, the problem with the SAMOS film readout in Earth orbit was the short time for a pass (just about 5-8 minutes at the altitude they flew). Also, at that time they had no encryption so the data could only be downloaded over the USA. They say this in their history of SAMOS, but…..

Crispin in Waterloo
March 12, 2015 3:55 pm

Wonderful project. I remember all of it. We were all space cowboys are heart in those days.
I was surprised and happy to see the optics mentioned:
“There were two lens systems for the camera, one with a 80mm focal length Schneider-Xenotar lens with the other being a 610mm focal length lens from Pacific Optical.”
When I worked for Bill Shaw at IMAX in its earliest days, he told me that the US space program was using Hasselblad cameras and lenses. At the time (1972) we were building the first IMAX planetarium projector for San Diego to replace the 72-projector Zeiss and approached Hasselblad, because of their reputation, to see if they wanted to build the projector lens for San Diego. It was an odd-looking collection of 13 elements that had taken a fully automatic computer program a full month to optimise. Projecting a clear colour picture on a hemisphere is quite demanding.
Hasselblad looked it over and declined – too difficult. At the time Japan was rising fast and that is where we ended up at a top flight lens grinder. It was surprisingly small in diameter considering that at the time the light bulb was 25 kW (before non-visible wavelengths were filtered out).
There is a photo of ‘space cameras’ at including an IMAX monster which looks like it has a 3000′ magazine on it – good for 10 minutes at 24 fps.
I am wondering if the 610 that went with the IMAX camera was from Pacific Optical. Sounds familiar but I failed to prove it. It was packed in the same suitcase as the 1000mm – just the two of them.
Yup – glory days!

March 12, 2015 5:13 pm

Also, Dennis, I have some contacts and I might be able to get you a “viewing” of the one extant LO camera instrument. It was donated to the museum by Kodak a few years back.
I was surprised to see a small heater glued to the front exterior surface of the “big lens” right in the middle of the field of view. I surmise this was there to control the temperature of the lens (for focus control). The optical obscuration ratio was small (maybe 5% of the total lens clear aperture) and it was in an “out of focus” location so it had little effect on the imaging performance (probably a small MTF degradation). It looks like they found it necessary while testing the units performance in TVAC (Thermal VACuum) testing.
Back in those days the thermal analysis tools where not as refined as they are today and test data taken when the unit was in the actual operating conditions was “gospel” (no offense intended against anyones religious beliefs) and model “projections” were always suspect. “In God we trust, everybody else, bring data”, a former NASA saying.
Cheers, KevinK

Reply to  KevinK
March 12, 2015 7:06 pm

Cool!! Send me an email!

Gary Pearse
March 12, 2015 6:53 pm

An honorable undertaking. Nice to see preservation of the technology of the golden age of space exploration. Will we ever ever again have the deep pleasure in being a member of our species that the early years of the space age gave to us. We need more demonstrations to ourselves of what magnificent creatures we are in this dark age of destructive guilt and deprecation that seems to be a part of our education and our psyches these days.

Reply to  Gary Pearse
March 12, 2015 7:07 pm


Reply to  denniswingo
March 13, 2015 2:50 pm

And a awomen, too 🙂
The Git still has the Hasselblad book of pix from the moonlanding.

March 12, 2015 7:10 pm

Thanks for the note about the SAMOS link. When I edit the wordpress file, the link is there. So…..
Here is the Link for SAMOS to the Moon…

March 13, 2015 3:40 am

If the resolution was so whizbang, why are there no stars?

Reply to  Frosty
March 13, 2015 6:08 am

They forgot to put them on the backdrop around the soundstage. Call it a production oversight. (Do I have to put sarc off?)

Reply to  Frosty
March 13, 2015 6:16 am

Do you see stars (or planets) in the middle of the day on earth?

Reply to  Frosty
March 13, 2015 6:23 am

It’s called dynamic range. The Moon is 1,000,000,000 x brighter than any star in any of the images.

Reply to  denniswingo
March 13, 2015 7:00 am

Cheers Dennis, I should have just googled it, I’ve been hopelessly conditioned by too much Hollywood sci-fi!

Reply to  Frosty
March 14, 2015 6:26 am

I dunno–maybe they were too stupid to pack flash bulbs and had to shoot in the sunlight.

March 13, 2015 8:00 am

Earth is a synchronous satellite with respect to the moon. It’s wobbly, but it does not rise.

Reply to  Jeff Glassman
March 13, 2015 9:15 am

Jeff, technically you are correct. However, a spacecraft in Lunar orbit sees and “Earthrise” every time it comes around the far side. Technically speaking the image should be rotated 90 degrees to the left but it looks more dramatic this way and that is how it has always been presented.

William Grubel
March 13, 2015 10:20 am

Its not as much as I’d like, but my $100 is in. I have every newspaper from the Mercury and Apollo days stored. Do you suppose I could get them added to the project? LOL. Seriously, you guys are now officially added to my Hero list.

Reply to  William Grubel
March 13, 2015 12:02 pm

William, if you have papers that specifically mention the lunar orbiters, especially around August/November of 1966 we can get them added to our errata files that go to the National Space Science Data Center.

Andrew Russell
March 13, 2015 11:50 am

Great project! One question: are the Lunar Orbiters still in orbit?
In 1971, just after finishing a B.S. in Aerospace Engineering, my Dad and I flew to the Cape and got to watch Apollo 15 launch for the Moon from the VIP view site next to the Vertical Assembly Building. A truly memorable experience.

Reply to  Andrew Russell
March 13, 2015 12:03 pm

The Lunar Orbiters were all intentionally crashed before the first Apollo mission to preclude interference or navigational hazard.

Steve Jones
March 14, 2015 12:40 pm

What a fantastic project. Well done Mr Wingo, you are adding tremendously to the legacy of the early space age and can justifiably be proud of your efforts. I can just remember Apollo 17. My father and I were watching it on tv (in the UK) when he suggested we go outside and look at the moon. As we looked up he said, “Just think son, there are men standing on the moon right now.” That memory is still crystal clear. I couldn’t agree more with the comments by Gary Pearse above. During the early space age young people were encouraged to dream and make those dreams come true, no matter how difficult the task. Not any more, there is a huge green/liberal industry determined to make our young think that regressing to the stone age is the right thing to do. To which I say ‘Bullsh*t’. I now have a young son and would love to be able to share an experience with him, celebrating an equally impressive human achievement, that could match that from my childhood.
It is sad really that we have to look increasingly further back in history to finds things like the Lunar Orbiter project that make you proud to be human.

Reply to  Steve Jones
March 14, 2015 7:51 pm

While pessimism is warranted in many areas, there is emerging hope in the arena of commercial space. The principle problem today is lack of capital for applications that we know we can do. I use the past as a guide and mine a lot of the exceedingly interesting NASA technical ideas from the 60’s, 70’s and 80’s. Don’t give up hope, it is my opinion that Space is our future and I request to everyone to do what you can to support commercial space! (also beware of the scammers as there are many out there)

Steve Jones
March 15, 2015 3:56 am

Mr Wingo,
You are absolutely right that we should remain optimistic.

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights