back to article First space Hasselblad goes under the hammer

The first Hasselblad camera to travel into space will go under the hammer next week, over 50 years after it was carried aloft by Walter M Schirra on the Mercury MA-8 mission. View of the first Hasselblad in space The first Hasselblad in space - yours for $10k+ Camera enthusiast Schirra bought the 500c and 80mm Zeiss lens …

I have it on authority that Helen Sharman took private photos from space and had them developed in Boots (or similar):

"Me on the beach"

"A seagull"

"Me eating a lolly"

"The Earth from space"

13
0
Paris Hilton

The crucial question is:

does it post selfies automatically to facebook and twitter?

. . . useless otherwise, innit?

2
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: The crucial question is:

Potentially yes.

If you know anything about Hasselblad and "medium format" cameras you'd know they have interchangeable backs. So for film you'd use a film back and there are lots of digital backs to fit.

So it's not beyond the realms of impossibility that a digital back with Internet connectivity could be made. But obviously it wouldn't given this camera would take a 40 megapixel image typically.

3
0
Silver badge
Coat

damn. I would

If I had a spare $10K kicking around I'd go for it. TwaMysBook or not.

5
0

a bargain

I can't afford to spend that on what's basically a souvenir either but imagine you had Vasco de Gamo's sextant for sale, with documents of sale and unimpeachible authenticity? Your grandchildren would thank you for buying this.

2
0

Looks like JJ Abrams was behind the camera for at least one of those shots.

5
0
Silver badge

So the moon landings weren't shot in a studio - they were all done with CGI.

Pretty impressive for the 1960s ;-)

3
0
Anonymous Coward

from the 3rd photo

No stars in space?

Strange, but when i go outside and look up at the sky at night time i can see quite a few. But when in space it seems they just disappear....strange that.

0
9

Re: from the 3rd photo

The reason that the stars do not show up in the photo is that the stars are so dim that the camera cannot gather enough of their light in a short exposure. Our eyes are a lot more sensitive to light than photographic film hence you can see them standing on earth, but I bet you would have much the same issue taking a photo of them and having them visible - without using some really long exposure settings.

6
0
Silver badge

Re: from the 3rd photo

http://asd.gsfc.nasa.gov/archive/hubble/multimedia/astronomy.html

http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/archive/releases/2006/2006/33/image/b/format/xlarge_web/

0
0

Re: from the 3rd photo

Quite right - not just the moon landings but in fact all space travel is faked. It is of course quite impossible to penetrate the crystal dome that our flat land is nestled beneath, within the encircling sea. The only remaining puzzle is why the Govt of our land goes to such extraordinary lengths to maintain the fiction of other countries existing.

15
0

Re: The only remaining puzzle

They can't tax you for war spending if there aren't any other countries.

8
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: from the 3rd photo

What about the SUN? That's a star. why have none of these Astronauts turned 180 degrees and took a snap of the sun? Not baiting here by the way, just interested in your explanations.

0
4

Re: from the 3rd photo

"Not baiting here". Right, you write dumb messages attached to every space article wondering where the stars are. You've been told repeatedly that's a silly question, and people even have attempted to educate you on basic photography, but nope, you just keep doing it.

And now you're asking why nobody has photographed the sun? Have you ever looked at the sun, for even a moment? No imagine doing that through an unfiltered lens. Please don't ask stupid questions, or ask a 5th grader, who will think it's a stupid question too, but may have more patience with the crazy person.

9
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: The only remaining puzzle - war spending

Most cynical justification for ignoring the Flat Earth Society ever.

1
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: from the 3rd photo

You could of course get a disposable film camera (they still exist) and try taking a picture of the sky at night. Or use your phone camera.

The ISO speed of the dark adapted human eye is around 60 000, whereas back in the 1970s most film speed was around 50-400 ISO, and a handheld Hasselblad will not give full sharpness for exposures more than about 1/100 sec, shorter if the FP shutter is used (even very small camera shake prevents stars from being imaged because they are effectively point sources, so you cannot hold the image steady on one part of the film). You would need to be able to hold the camera rock still for an exposure of about 20 seconds to image stars.

Thus, if you see pictures of illuminated, moving objects in space and stars are visible, it is fakery.

5
0

The problem is that the sun is very very bright

And you are not...

11
0
Silver badge
Coat

Re: from the 3rd photo

At night I go outside and look around, and most of the idiots disappear.

Strange that.

Wish it happened more often.

7
0
Silver badge

Re: from the 3rd photo

In contrast I go outside and it seems crawling with idiots - when I go inside many of them dissapear

1
0

Re: from the 3rd photo

Here is the unadulterated pic that was taken by the camera before NASA deliberately photoshopped out the stars to keep the conspiracy industry alive: clickety

2
0
Silver badge

Re: from the 3rd photo

"That's a star. why have none of these Astronauts turned 180 degrees and took a snap of the sun?"

The Skylab space station actually spent a great deal of time photographing the sun through a telescope. For astronauts, they have photographed the sun while on space walks:

http://www.space.com/17495-astronaut-touches-sun-spacewalk-photo.html

It was in the news and one of the top results of my simple Google search: astronaut photograph of sun

Switching to image search produced a wealth of space-based photos of the sun. I think this one: a selfie with the Earth and sun as a background.

http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/images/station/crew-32/hires/iss032e025258.jpg

Sun and solar wing:

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4106/5197445442_b69a8d5da6_b.jpg

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/03/03/article-2572080-1BFF782000000578-473_964x557.jpg

2
0

Re: from the 3rd photo

Oh man, that ISS selfie is SO damn cool. Saving for my desktop photo, thanks!

0
0

Coincidence

Just finishing 'The Right Stuff' by Tom Wolfe just now, and last night was Cooper's flight.

Well worth reading (or watching - the film was also excellent).

4
0

Re: Coincidence

It's a shame that Tom Wolfe didn't complete his original project of writing about the entire US space program up to the space shuttle. Granted, this would probably have meant that he didn't get diverted into test pilot anthropology and it wouldn't have been half as good, but in my dreams what we have is just "The Right Stuff volume 1 of 3"

4
0
Silver badge
WTF?

But why.....?

Seeing as nobody else has asked what seems to be an obvious question, I'll ask it....why is he wearing 2 wristwatches in the 2nd photo?

0
0
Silver badge

Re: But why.....?

Redundant systems.

1
1

Re: But why.....?

Astronauts were serious jet-setters, regularly hopping into one-man planes for meetings on the other side of the country. He probably had a watch set for his current location and Cape time, would be my guess.

1
0
Silver badge

Re: But why.....?

"Seeing as nobody else has asked what seems to be an obvious question, I'll ask it....why is he wearing 2 wristwatches in the 2nd photo?"

Because he's a f*cking astronaut and can do what he damn well pleases! Dagnabbit, Wally Schirra craps more awesome after a night on Sam Adams that you can bring in a week with all your computer cleverness!

Now, get off his lawn!

10
0

Re: But why.....?

NASA pensions weren't inflation indexed so now that "Life" magazine is defunct 3/4 of his income comes from selling knock-off Rolexes at markets. He has another dozen inside the jacket

4
0
Silver badge

Re: But why.....?

Each watch was made in a different state that had a congressman that supported the Nasa budget.

5
0
Pint

Re: But why.....?

*Wally checks left wrist*

"Ah, 3:00 PM. Time to kick some asses."

*Wally yawns, stretches, checks right wrist*

"3:07 PM. I suppose I'll take some names now."

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Price

Do you think it will fetch more than the first apple computer?

0
0

Re: Price

They're both pretty unique, so it's hard to say, but I know which one I'd rather have - the Hasselblad is still functional (even useful with a digital back), and it's been in freaking SPACE.

6
0

I know a guy who loves cameras and has money

and I just sent the auction link to his son.... here's fingers crossed!

0
0

Earth

Amazing photos, although I cant decide if the crease I am seeing in the first photo of earth is some kind of light effect or not. Can anyone shed any light?

0
0

Re: Earth

My uneducated guess is that the "crease" could be a reflection on the inner surface of the spaceship's window, possibly a reflection of the astronaut's white suit.

1
0

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Forums

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017