Taking pictures on the moon

[biglouis]

One thing which has intrigued me for a long time is the method by which the astronauts on the moon took pictures using their Hasselblad cameras.

I've tried researching this and although there are lots of examples of pictures, the detail on the camera and more importantly the technique by which the pictures were taken is very sparse.

For example, take this shot which is probably the most iconic from the first moon landing, Apollo 11, of Buzz Aldrin by Neil Armstrong.

Given that the camera was strapped to his chest, that with the type of gloves they wore any kind of adjust must have been difficult and (I assume) they did not have lightmeters to work out aperture and exposure, how on earth did this picture get taken?

I can understand that there might have been a fixed aperture lens but back in 1969 did Hasselblad have an auto-metering camera?

Like I say, I have searched for information via the interweb but if anyone knows of any articles that explain this in detail I would be interested in the links.

LouisB

 

[Olof B]

This is a interesting topic.
The pictures from the moon made me start using Hasselblad and getting interested in the early space flights (up to the 3rd Shuttle flight)
To start with I would recommend two nice sites, where almost everything can be found.
The Apollo Lunar Surface Journal and Apollo Flight Journal
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/
http://history.nasa.gov/afj/

To get back to the hardware:

To change the shutter and aperture there was tabs on the rings.
There is a picture on this site where you can see it clearly
http://www.nasm.si.edu/collections/artifact.cfm?id=A19980005000 or
http://www.nasm.si.edu/images/collections/media/full/A19980005000cp08.jpg

I can't remember reading this but the interlocking must have been removed to make the usage easier.

And now to what values to use.
They (NASA) knew well what kind of whether it is on the moon (always sunny), so they put a cheat note on top of the magazine about what values to use in what direction, regarding to the sun, the picture is taken.
http://www.nasm.si.edu/collections/artifact.cfm?id=A19980009000
http://www.nasm.si.edu/images/collections/media/full/A19980009000cp01.JPG

And regarding the "remove darkslide BEFORE installing magazine"
Here is the explanation:
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/alsj-DarkSlide.html

And to your question if there is any single article on the web that is giving the whole picture.
No, I haven't found any, but pieces here and there.

But I hope that is cleared some of your questions?

 

[biglouis]

Olaf

Thank you so much for sharing those links with me. I did not find them while searching so you have saved me a lot of time.

They also answer my questions.

I assumed there would be a lot more automation but to think they had to perform all the camera management and preparation tasks we do when using Hasselblad cameras is just amazing!

But I suppose that is one of the beauties of the Hass system that it is very simple to use.

One other intriguing thought I had. Why not Leica? After all both companies at the time would have been (and still are?) recognised as the highest quality manufacturers. Apart from the obvious advantage of MF format over 35mm I suspect the chief reason may have been the magazine management.

Anyway, many thanks - your thoughtful response has provided me with a lot of information to digest.

With best regards

Louis