«

Photography In Space by Captain Alan Poindexter

See:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/lo...in_space.shtml

An interesting commentary of photography in space, and some superb shots!
I hope you will enjoy.

Cheers,
David

"David J Taylor" <david-> writes:

> Photography In Space by Captain Alan Poindexter
>
> See:
>
> http://www.luminous-landscape.com/lo...in_space.shtml
>
> An interesting commentary of photography in space, and some superb
> shots! I hope you will enjoy.

Ooh, thanks for pointing this out!
--
David Dyer-Bennet, dd-; http://dd-b.net/
Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/
Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/
Dragaera: http://dragaera.info

"Alfred Molon" <> wrote in message
news:. ..
> In article <jn2uk1$52l$>, David J Taylor says...
>> Photography In Space by Captain Alan Poindexter
>>
>> See:
>>
>>
>> http://www.luminous-landscape.com/lo...in_space.shtml
>
> Looks like you need a high ISO camera like the Nikon D3s in that
> environment, although lots of shots were also taken at lower ISO
> settings.
>
> I assume the mirror in the DSLR falls down not due to gravity, but due
> to a spring mechanism?
>
> And can you use a DSLR or other camera in space (outside where there is
> no air, or will it fail due to radiation or lack of air?
> --
>
> Alfred Molon

Yes, a DSLR works quite happily in a zero-gravity environment, and outside
(it's mentioned in the article). Hasselblads were, famously, used on the
surface of the moon.

Also mentioned (but possibly elsewhere is that the higher radiation level
not only causes flashes in the eyes (up to twice a minute hen passing
through the South Atlantic Anomaly), but also created faulty pixels in
digital cameras. I guess they either have to run a pixel check/correction
every so often, or recycle the cameras from time to time.

Cheers,
David

"David J Taylor" <david-> wrote:
>Yes, a DSLR works quite happily in a zero-gravity environment, and outside
>(it's mentioned in the article). Hasselblads were, famously, used on the
>surface of the moon.


Hasselblads were indeed used on the moon landings, but they were not
SLRs. As part of the modifications of the cameras, the mirror
mechanism and pentaprism were removed and a direct vision viewfinder
was provided.

The first Hasselblad SLR to be used in space was with the Apollo/Soyuz
mission in 1975, three years after the last of the Apollo moon
landings.

On 23 Apr 2012 in rec.photo.digital, Alfred Molon wrote:

> I assume the mirror in the DSLR falls down not due to gravity, but due
> to a spring mechanism?

Since I can use my fairly basic dSLR - and other (d)SLRs going back four
decades - in an inverted position here in 1 G, I'd have to assume that
yes, they have a return spring.

--
Joe Makowiec
http://makowiec.org/
Email: http://makowiec.org/contact/?Joe
Usenet Improvement Project: http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/

Alfred Molon <> writes:

> In article <jn2uk1$52l$>, David J Taylor says...
>> Photography In Space by Captain Alan Poindexter
>>
>> See:
>>
>> http://www.luminous-landscape.com/lo...in_space.shtml
>
> Looks like you need a high ISO camera like the Nikon D3s in that
> environment, although lots of shots were also taken at lower ISO
> settings.

Wide dynamic range is probably more important. He did amazingly well --
but then, he had lots of specific training and is presumably a very
bright person. And was interested in photography, it's not just a job
added to his list for that flight.

> I assume the mirror in the DSLR falls down not due to gravity, but due
> to a spring mechanism?

That's probably important even on earth; vertical format, and all that.
Sometimes cameras even get mounted upside down.

> And can you use a DSLR or other camera in space (outside where there is
> no air, or will it fail due to radiation or lack of air)?

They did send them outside, and the article mentions modifications, but
mostly a heat blanket, and a big buttons so they can use it with the
heavy gloves. He didn't detail changes for vacuum, but I think he
mentioned them.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, dd-; http://dd-b.net/
Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/
Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/
Dragaera: http://dragaera.info

I remember reading somewhere that NASA selected Nikon cameras because
the Fluorite in Canon lenses is very brittle at extreme cold (= space)
conditions.

Also, I suppose they used the heat blanket (and an oversized shutter
button) in order to combat the extreme cold (= batteries losing
efficiency) and the oversized thumbs due to astronaut suits.

N.F.

Nick Fotis <> wrote:
> I remember reading somewhere that NASA selected Nikon cameras because
> the Fluorite in Canon lenses is very brittle at extreme cold (= space)
> conditions.

Which "extreme cold" conditions would there be in LEO?

Most of the time --- i.e. outside the Earth shadow --- you're in
*full* sunlight, with no atmosphere to cool you (wind, convection),
no clouds and no atmosphere to attenuate the rays. Remember how
hot you can get just lying in the sun on a hot, cloudless day:
in space, you get even more heat from the sun and it doesn't
need to warm up half a continent of soil and rocks and handle
an atmosphere distributing the heat --- it just has to warm
the camera! And the camera also helps: all that electric power
is going into heat.

In space, in the habitable zone or closer, you're never cold.
If you want cold, you need to work *hard*: heat shields against
the sun, rejecting waste heat to space, waste heat management, etc.
In fact, if you're a human *anywhere* in space and don't properly
reject heat, you're going to boil pretty soon. 100 W waste
heat accumulate pretty fast in a space suit.

So the camera can get really warm and cool down to normal a lot.

See the white/gray panels 90° to the solar panels: They're
rejecting heat from the ISS. Note the open cargo bay of the
space shuttle: the interior of the doors reject heat

-Wolfgang

Bowser <> wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Apr 2012 06:45:33 +0100, "David J Taylor"

>>Yes, a DSLR works quite happily in a zero-gravity environment, and outside
>>(it's mentioned in the article). Hasselblads were, famously, used on the
>>surface of the moon.

> Yes, but modified. And the bodies are still there. Only the film
> magazines made the return trip to save weight.

Think what a collector would pay for them ...

-Wolfgang

Let's suppose that your logic is correct.

What happens, then, when you are in the shadow of the ISS with your camera?

Regarding the fluorite-based lenses, these may be working well when in
direct sun, but when you got the low temperatures from working in the
shadow of the ISS (or Earth's shadow), it could become very brittle.

Not all missions and EVAs happen exclusively during daylight (a full
rotation is nearly 1.5 hours, if I remember correctly)

N.F.