Digital archive casts new light on Apollo-era moon pictures (Forwarded)

Arizona State University
College of Liberal Arts and Sciences
School of Earth and Space Exploration
Tempe, Arizona

Contact:
Robert Burnham, 480-458-8207

August 1, 2007

Digital archive casts new light on Apollo-era moon pictures

Arizona State University partners with NASA to digitize original photos

TEMPE, Ariz. -- Nearly 40 years after man first walked on the moon, the
complete lunar photographic record from the Apollo project will be
accessible to both researchers and the general public on the Internet. A
new digital archive -- created through a collaboration between Arizona
State University and NASA's Johnson Space Center in Houston -- is making
available high-resolution scans of original Apollo flight films. They are
available to browse or download at:
http://apollo.sese.asu.edu

The digital scans are detailed enough to reveal photographic grain.
Created from original flight films transported back to Earth from the
moon, the archive includes photos taken from lunar orbit as well as from
the lunar surface. This is the first project to make digital scans of all
the original lunar photographs from NASA's Apollo missions.

"This project fulfills a long-held wish of mine. It'll give everyone a
chance to see this unique collection of images as clearly as when they
were taken," says Mark Robinson, professor of geological sciences in ASU's
School of Earth and Space Exploration, part of the College of Liberal Arts
and Sciences.

Robinson leads the ASU side of the Apollo image digitizing project.
Separately, he is the principal investigator for the Lunar Reconnaissance
Orbiter Camera, or LROC (lroc.sese.asu.edu) -- a suite of three separate,
high-resolution imagers on board NASA's Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter, due
for launch in October 2008.

The reason the original Apollo images have been so seldom accessed is that
they are literally irreplaceable. Between 1968 and 1972, NASA made sets of
duplicate images after each moon mission came back to Earth, placing the
duplicate sets in various scientific libraries and research facilities
around the world.

As a result, these second-generation copies (and subsequent copies of
copies) are what scientists and the public have seen. The copied images
are unsharp and over-contrasty compared to the originals, which have
remained in deep-freeze storage at the Johnson Space Center. Even many
lunar scientists have not seen or worked with them.

The Apollo digitizing project goes back to the original flight films and
scans them in high-resolution detail to reveal their subtleties.

Robinson explains, "We worked with the scanner's manufacturer -- Leica
Geosystems -- to improve the brightness range that the scans record." In
technical terms, a normal 12-bit scan was increased to 14-bit, resulting
in digital images that record more than 16,000 shades of gray.

"Similarly," says Robinson, "to get all the details captured by the film,
we are scanning at a scale of 200 pixels per millimeter." This means, he
says, the grain of the original film is visible when scans are fully
enlarged. The most detailed images from lunar orbit show rocks and other
surface features about 40 inches (1 meter) wide.

Combining high resolution and wide brightness range produces very large
raw image files, notes Robinson. For example, in raw form, the scans of
the Apollo mapping (metric) camera frames, each 4.7 inches square, are 1.3
gigabytes in size.

"That's bigger than most people want to look at with a browser," says
Robinson, "even if their browser and Internet connection are up to the
job." So the Web site uses a Flash-based application called Zoomify, which
lets users dive deep into a giant image by loading only the portion being
examined. Links are available on the site for downloading images in
several sizes, up to the full raw scan.

The project will take about three years to complete and will scan some
36,000 images. These include about 600 frames in 35 mm, roughly 20,000
Hasselblad 60 mm frames (color, and black and white), more than 10,000
mapping camera frames, and about 4,600 panoramic camera frames.

"These photos have great scientific value, despite being taken decades
ago," says Robinson.

He adds, "I think they also give everybody a beautiful look at this small,
ancient world next door to us."

Andrew Yee wrote:
Arizona State University
College of Liberal Arts and Sciences
School of Earth and Space Exploration
Tempe, Arizona

Contact:
Robert Burnham, 480-458-8207

August 1, 2007

Digital archive casts new light on Apollo-era moon pictures


These are going to be a ball to go through!
Look, you can zoom on them, just like Google Earth:
http://apollo.sese.asu.edu/METRIC_PR...15-M-0085.html
Makes one feel like Ranger 7 heading in for impact.
It'll be interesting to see the S-IVB impact sites at this resolution.
As well as peeking around inside Alphonsus crater for volcanic features.

Pat

On Aug 1, 1:31 pm, Pat Flannery wrote:
Andrew Yee wrote:
Arizona State University
College of Liberal Arts and Sciences
School of Earth and Space Exploration
Tempe, Arizona

Contact:
Robert Burnham, 480-458-8207

August 1, 2007

Digital archive casts new light on Apollo-era moon pictures

These are going to be a ball to go through!
Look, you can zoom on them, just like Google Earth:http://apollo.sese.asu.edu/METRIC_PR...15-M-0085.html
Makes one feel like Ranger 7 heading in for impact.
It'll be interesting to see the S-IVB impact sites at this resolution.
As well as peeking around inside Alphonsus crater for volcanic features.

Pat

Too bad that it's all nothing but a grand ruse.

Too bad we still haven't anything at the moon's L1.

Too bad that moon is so gamma and Xray saturated.

Too bad they had such **** poor camera/film DR.

Too bad Venus was always invisible.

Too bad we still don't have a viable fly-by-rocket lander.

Too bad there's too many other too bads to deal with.
- Brad Guth

On Aug 1, 2:51 pm, BradGuth wrote:
On Aug 1, 1:31 pm, Pat Flannery wrote:





Andrew Yee wrote:
Arizona State University
College of Liberal Arts and Sciences
School of Earth and Space Exploration
Tempe, Arizona

Contact:
Robert Burnham, 480-458-8207

August 1, 2007

Digital archive casts new light on Apollo-era moon pictures

These are going to be a ball to go through!
Look, you can zoom on them, just like Google Earth:http://apollo.sese.asu.edu/METRIC_PR...15-M-0085.html
Makes one feel like Ranger 7 heading in for impact.
It'll be interesting to see the S-IVB impact sites at this resolution.
As well as peeking around inside Alphonsus crater for volcanic features.

Pat

Too bad that it's all nothing but a grand ruse.

Too bad we still haven't anything at the moon's L1.

Too bad that moon is so gamma and Xray saturated.

Too bad they had such **** poor camera/film DR.

Too bad Venus was always invisible.

Too bad we still don't have a viable fly-by-rocket lander.

Too bad there's too many other too bads to deal with.
- Brad Guth

BTW, there's no question about images as having been obtained and
processed on the fly, via robotics in orbit.

Without so much as one orginal frame, or any portion of film leader or
trailer for science to explore in detail, there's simply no way of our
telling when or where such film was exposed, or having been
subsequently processed without so much as any hint of radiation or
thermal exposure.
- Brad Guth

"Andrew Yee" wrote in message
...
Arizona State University
College of Liberal Arts and Sciences
School of Earth and Space Exploration
Tempe, Arizona

Contact:
Robert Burnham, 480-458-8207

August 1, 2007

Digital archive casts new light on Apollo-era moon pictures

Arizona State University partners with NASA to digitize original photos

TEMPE, Ariz. -- Nearly 40 years after man first walked on the moon, the
complete lunar photographic record from the Apollo project will be
accessible to both researchers and the general public on the Internet. A
new digital archive -- created through a collaboration between Arizona
State University and NASA's Johnson Space Center in Houston -- is making
available high-resolution scans of original Apollo flight films. They are
available to browse or download at:
http://apollo.sese.asu.edu

The digital scans are detailed enough to reveal photographic grain.

I wonder how the "faked lunar landing" conspiracy nuts will react to this
site.

Jeff
--
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a
little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor
safety"
- B. Franklin, Bartlett's Familiar Quotations (1919)

On Aug 2, 6:07 am, "Jeff Findley" wrote:
"Andrew Yee" wrote in message

...





Arizona State University
College of Liberal Arts and Sciences
School of Earth and Space Exploration
Tempe, Arizona

Contact:
Robert Burnham, 480-458-8207

August 1, 2007

Digital archive casts new light on Apollo-era moon pictures

Arizona State University partners with NASA to digitize original photos

TEMPE, Ariz. -- Nearly 40 years after man first walked on the moon, the
complete lunar photographic record from the Apollo project will be
accessible to both researchers and the general public on the Internet. A
new digital archive -- created through a collaboration between Arizona
State University and NASA's Johnson Space Center in Houston -- is making
available high-resolution scans of original Apollo flight films. They are
available to browse or download at:
http://apollo.sese.asu.edu

The digital scans are detailed enough to reveal photographic grain.

I wonder how the "faked lunar landing" conspiracy nuts will react to this
site.

Jeff

There's good enough image data as is that proves we haven't walked on
that moon, but a fresh scan of those raw original Kodak moments would
offer an improvement, especially since the dynamic range of that film
should have had more than enough DR for having recorded a good half
dozen off-moon items besides Earth and our sun. Of those robotic
obtained images from orbit are likely for real, as having been
processed on the fly (sort of speak) and transmitted back to Earth.
After all, film is somewhat like human DNA, except as having once been
nailed by gamma and Xrays prior to getting processed is unable to
repair itself, so the evidence of cosmic, solar and of all the
unavoidable secondary moon radiation damage simply has to be there to
behold.

Human DNA onboard the 15 g/cm2 shielded ISS (roughly equal to having
2" worth of aluminum), as if it were parked at the moon's L1 would be
good for a few days before needing their banked bone marrow. Of
orbiting to within 100 km is perhaps worth at best a few brief orbits
before matters of DNA trauma becomes too extensive. Of any surface
EVA is worth at best on a passive solar day a few hours, on a bad halo
CME kind of solar day could represent as little as a few minutes.

Anything of common matter is capable of being gamma reactive, and the
greater the given density the greater the conversion of cosmic gamma
plus whatever's of solar radiation that goes into becoming other forms
of energy such as soft gamma, hard-Xrays and so forth as this process
unavoidably happens to such naked orbs or that of your spacecraft.
Even the raw solar influx of hard-Xrays becomes unavoidably soft-
Xrays, although some of that solar Xray influx that's soft or hard
becomes reflected energy, whereas damn little of the original cosmic
gamma energy ever gets reflected by our physically dark and dusty moon
that's oddly somewhat salty, as though having been derived from some
icy Oort cloud, as well as for having those deposits of significant
surface mascons that's obviously of much greater than your typical
basalt density.

Of course, the moon itself has its own cache of radioactive elements,
including heavy reactive substances such as cobalt, titanium and
iron. Therefore, some of the narrow bandpass Xray image and bandpass
gamma image results were those of what the moon itself has to offer,
as having been imaged from our side of our vast 70,000 km
magnetosphere and thereby having to look directly through those lethal
Van Allen belts, which only proves how much greater dosage of gamma
and Xrays our moon is worth compared to any Van Allen belt or that of
the surrounding space of background cosmic and solar radiation.

According to NASA/Apollo, none of these questions apply:

How is anything that's so naked (including Hydrogen) not reactive to
cosmic gamma?

How the heck is the given surface density of our moon less reactive
than atmosphere?

What's keeping our moon from being less lethal than the worse of any
Van Allen Belt?

BTW, most all other than lethal Xray solar energy that's not being
directly reflected becomes secondary/recoil photons of IR and FIR. No
wonder that by day it's so double extra toasty hot on that moon,
especially nasty if you're continually surrounded by that minimum of
3.14e6 m2 that's secondary radiating everything from the thermal
realms of far IR to the DNA lethal spectrum of gamma plus all else
that's secondary/recoil. Basically and especially by day, even within
a quality moonsuit, that naked moon of ours (meaning w/o atmosphere
and w/o magnetosphere) is not the least bit any more so human DNA
friendly than something worse off than a microwave oven.
- Brad Guth

It was 2 Aug 2007, when Jeff Findley commented:

"Andrew Yee" wrote in message
...
Arizona State University College of Liberal Arts and Sciences School of
Earth and Space Exploration Tempe, Arizona Contact: Robert Burnham,
480-458-8207 August 1, 2007 Digital archive casts new light on
Apollo-era moon pictures Arizona State University partners with NASA to
digitize original photos TEMPE, Ariz. -- Nearly 40 years after man
first walked on the moon, the complete lunar photographic record from the
Apollo project will be accessible to both researchers and the general
public on the Internet. A new digital archive -- created through a
collaboration between Arizona State University and NASA's Johnson Space
Center in Houston -- is making available high-resolution scans of
original Apollo flight films. They are available to browse or download
at: http://apollo.sese.asu.edu The digital scans are detailed
enough to reveal photographic grain.

I wonder how the "faked lunar landing" conspiracy nuts will react to this
site.

As compared to the "faked lunar landing" intellectual theorists like
myself? grin

I mean, if you can fake billions of dollars in Weapons of Mass
Destruction...

If you can fake trying to find the worst terrorist in the world, who is in
a teensy little area in which he is well known, surrounded by (alleged)
enemies, and happens to be over six feet tall, well known, profoundly
skinny, and dependent on dialysis...

What, a few easy, staged TV shots, what's the problem? I mean, the same
shots were shown in every '60s era Sci Fi flick, and done much better, so
what's one more piece of fiction?

Not that I believe alla that. But I can certainly see their point. And
now, hey, a high school kid could fake landing upside down inside the
Capitol Dome. Probably already been done on MySpace, three times, and
with better sound effects.

And aliens. Gotta have aliens. What, landing on the moon, and no aliens?
Why'd ya bother to spend alla them millions of dollars?

Not that I believe the government would ever lie to us. Perish the
thought. I believe them implicitly.

--
grizzly at grizzly dot podzone dot org
Podcast http://grizzly.libsyn.com
The Life and Times of a Minor Local Celebrity
Promo http://media.libsyn.com/media/grizzly/grizprom.mp3

On Aug 8, 8:34 pm, "David Smith"
wrote:
Not that I believe the government would ever lie to us. Perish the
thought. I believe them implicitly.

So did all of those smart Jews that sucked up to Hitler, were able to
not only keep their wealth and power but gained much more as time went
on, even long after their puppet boss took his own life.
- Brad Guth

You'd think that a mere one or two counts of gamma per cm2 per second
is no big deal, of which to the somewhat wusssy density of our human
DNA it supposedly isn't all that insurmountable as long as sufficient
replacement DNAs are being generated in order to replace those few
damaged by gamma or those worse impacted by the more DNA lethal
secondary worth of Xrays.

We're told that outside of our protective environment, including
exterior to our magnetosphere, is worth at least one and perhaps two
counts per cm2 per second of cosmic gamma and hard-Xray hits, thus
still not imposing any insurmountable degree of radiation in of
itself. However, the physical density and vast area of which our
naked moon represents itself as a rather big anticathode naked sphere,
as such seems to beg for some honest physics math.

Remember that we always have 10,000 cm2 or of those surface cm3 per m2
at our disposal, and remember that gamma has the ability of
interacting with such common mass as basalt, in a way of such energy
producing roughly the square root of that gamma influx count becoming
hard-Xrays that'll tend to cause far more human DNA trauma and
subsequent collateral damage, thus causing internal biologiucal demise
than introduced by the raw gamma energy itself.

So, if we're honestly being out and about, such as trekking off to
wherever that's obviously external to our protective magnetosphere,
for example taking on a mere 2 hits/cm2 = 20,000 hits/m2 = 142 hard-
Xrays per m2 coming off the surrounding turf of our physically dark
and somewhat salty old moon.

Since there's no significant atmosphere other than a highly measurable
degree of sodium that's not all that likely attinuating the incoming
or outgoing gamma or Xray energy, means that the naked moon itself is
actually providing somewhat of an ideal anticathode, especially
derived from the greater density of its surface deposits and
unavoidably of all those mascon areas suggesting of having iron or
heavier sorts of element deposits, that which should by the laws of
physics create even greater counts of them pesky secondary/recoil
Xrays and/or soft gamma.

At merely 142 counts worth of hard-Xrays per m2/sec becomes even more
interesting once taking into account that avoiding 3.14e6 m2 of
whatever's typically surrounding your EVA moonsuit naked butt of frail
DNA shouldn't be all that under-appreciated. In fact, if moonsuit
trekking upon local surface elevations is where that total exposure to
the naked moon that's so gamma and Xray saturated can get your frail
DNA exposed to at least 3.14e9 m2, and obviously it only gets worse
yet via orbiting that physically dark sucker, whereas it's going to
allow an exposure to at least 6.28e11 m2 if not as great as 1e12 m2,
all of which giving off soft gamma and hard-Xrays with hardly anything
of atmospheric density for attinuating squat. Of course the
surrounding aluminum of your spacecraft is also contributing its own
mighty gauntlet of secondary/recoil dosage that'll keep your
antibodies in full swing trying to defend your body from all of those
forign looking DNA as having recently been gamma and Xray mutated, and
it gets even more grim if you hadn't created that cache of banked bone
marrow before going outside of our protective Van allen zone, and/or
much less anywhere near that salty old moon of ours.

In other words, keeping as much distance between yourself and that
naked anticathode moon of ours is extremely important, that is unless
you've got a great deal of surrounding shield that's of not much
greater density than water or beer. Ten meters worth of beer should
do the trick if orbiting for any extended period within 100 km of that
gamma/Xray saturated moon, or short term shielding on behalf of a few
days worth that's having just one meter of beer should also become
doable within the mission limits (typically of less than 50 rads) of
surviving such radiation dosage.

Terrestrial Radiation Geophysics / Gamma calculator
http://gsc.nrcan.gc.ca/gamma/gcalc_e.php

Repairing damaged DNA (on the fly sort of speak)
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2..._telomeres.htm

Physical Obstacles to Space Travel
http://www.skeptically.org/skeptics/id10.html
"Outside the atmosphere, the cosmic-ray bombardment is approximately
one proton or heavier nucleus per second passing through your finger
nail every second, or 5,000 though your body - each one leaving a
trail of broken chemical bonds and triggering the same cascade that
occurs in the atmosphere. It is estimated by NASA that about one-
third of the DNA in an astronaut's body would be cut by cosmic rays
every year. In space they would receive more than 80 rems per year-
the legal dose for a nuclear power-plant worker in the U.S. is 5 per
year. One in 10 male astronauts would eventually die from cancer
[attributable to their exposure], and one in six women (because of the
greater vulnerability to breast cancer)."

"It would take about 500 grams of material to shield 1 cm square.
Thus long-term space travel is beyond us." / Scientific American,
March 06

New Study Questions the Effects of Cosmic Proton Radiation on Human
Cells
http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=19082
"Scientists have been assuming that protons damage cells in a way
similar to x-rays, but our results indicate that these assumptions
have been wrong. The new data show that protons produce more
potentially lethal double-strand breaks, a type of severe DNA damage,
than other kinds of DNA damages," said Brookhaven biologist Betsy
Sutherland, the study's lead researcher. "This means that scientists
don't really know how human DNA is affected by the most numerous
particles in space and, as a result, do not know how to design the
proper protection for astronauts."

Terribly sorry about all of that pesky radiation on behalf of open
space travels, that which hasn't even a pesky gamma/Xray saturated
moon to deal with. Too bad the honest laws of physics and of our best
available science still can not be applied to anything NASA/Apollo.
(must be another Yiddish thing)

BTW, how the heck was all of that photon sensitive Kodak film so
unusually rad-hard?
- Brad Guth

I guess if you have "the right stuff" means that your otherwise frail
DNA has become rad-hard, and whatever film is somehow immune to
whatever primary of secondary dosage, even though somehow that
unfiltered Kodak film as having demonstrated such terrific
photographic dynamic range doesn't include Venus.

You'd think that a mere one or two counts of gamma per cm2 per second
is no big deal, of which to the somewhat wussy density of our human
DNA it supposedly isn't all that insurmountable as long as sufficient
replacement DNAs are being generated in order to replace those few
damaged by gamma or those worse impacted by the more DNA lethal
secondary worth of Xrays.

We're told by those all-knowing wizards of our NASA, that outside of
our protective environment, including exterior to our magnetosphere,
is worth at least one and perhaps two counts per cm2 per second of
cosmic gamma and hard-Xray hits, thus still not imposing any
insurmountable degree of radiation in of itself. However, the
physical density and vast area of which our naked moon represents
itself as a rather big anticathode naked sphere, as such seems to beg
for some honest physics math.

Remember that we always have 10,000 cm2 or of those surface cm3 per m2
at our disposal, and remember that gamma has the ability of
interacting with such common mass as basalt, in a way of such energy
producing roughly the square root of that gamma influx count becoming
hard-Xrays that'll tend to cause far more human DNA trauma and
subsequent collateral damage, thus causing internal biological demise
than introduced by the raw gamma energy itself.

So, if we're honestly being out and about, such as trekking off to
wherever that's obviously external to our protective magnetosphere,
for example taking on a mere 2 hits/cm2 = 20,000 hits/m2 = 142 hard-
Xrays per m2 coming off the surrounding turf of our physically dark
and somewhat salty old moon.

Since there's no significant atmosphere other than a highly measurable
degree of sodium that's not all that likely attenuating the incoming
or outgoing gamma or Xray energy, means that the naked moon itself is
actually providing somewhat of an ideal anticathode, especially
derived from the greater density of its surface deposits and
unavoidably of all those mascon areas suggesting of having iron or
heavier sorts of element deposits, that which should by the laws of
physics create even greater counts of them pesky secondary/recoil
Xrays and/or soft gamma.

At merely 142 counts worth of hard-Xrays per m2/sec becomes even more
interesting once taking into account that avoiding 3.14e6 m2 of
whatever's typically surrounding your EVA moonsuit naked butt of frail
DNA shouldn't be all that under-appreciated. In fact, moonsuit
trekking upon local surface elevations is where that total exposure to
the naked moon that's so gamma and Xray saturated can get your frail
DNA exposed to at least 3.14e9 m2, and obviously it only gets worse
yet via orbiting that physically dark sucker, whereas it's going to
allow an exposure to at least 6.28e11 m2 if not as great as 1e12 m2,
all of which giving off soft gamma and hard-Xrays with hardly anything
of atmospheric density for attenuating squat. Of course the
surrounding aluminum of your spacecraft is also contributing its own
mighty gauntlet of secondary/recoil dosage that'll keep your
antibodies in full swing trying to defend your irradiated body from
all of those foreign looking DNA as having recently been so nicely
gamma and Xray mutated, and it gets even more grim if you hadn't
created that cache of banked bone marrow before going outside of our
protective Van Allen zone, and/or much less on behalf of going
anywhere near that salty old moon of ours.

In other kind words, keeping as much distance between yourself and
that naked anticathode moon of ours is extremely important, that is
unless you've got a great deal of surrounding shield that's of not
much greater density than water or beer. Ten meters worth of beer
should do the trick if orbiting for any extended period within 100 km
of that gamma/Xray saturated moon, or short term shielding on behalf
of a few days worth that's having just one meter of beer should also
become doable within the mission limits (typically of less than 50
rads) of surviving such radiation dosage.

Terrestrial Radiation Geophysics / Gamma calculator
http://gsc.nrcan.gc.ca/gamma/gcalc_e.php

Repairing damaged DNA (on the fly sort of speak)
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2..._telomeres.htm

Physical Obstacles to Space Travel
http://www.skeptically.org/skeptics/id10.html
"Outside the atmosphere, the cosmic-ray bombardment is approximately
one proton or heavier nucleus per second passing through your finger
nail every second, or 5,000 though your body - each one leaving a
trail of broken chemical bonds and triggering the same cascade that
occurs in the atmosphere. It is estimated by NASA that about one-
third of the DNA in an astronaut's body would be cut by cosmic rays
every year. In space they would receive more than 80 rems per year-
the legal dose for a nuclear power-plant worker in the U.S. is 5 per
year. One in 10 male astronauts would eventually die from cancer
[attributable to their exposure], and one in six women (because of the
greater vulnerability to breast cancer)."

"It would take about 500 grams of material to shield 1 cm square.
Thus long-term space travel is beyond us." / Scientific American,
March 06

New Study Questions the Effects of Cosmic Proton Radiation on Human
Cells
http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=19082
"Scientists have been assuming that protons damage cells in a way
similar to x-rays, but our results indicate that these assumptions
have been wrong. The new data show that protons produce more
potentially lethal double-strand breaks, a type of severe DNA damage,
than other kinds of DNA damages," said Brookhaven biologist Betsy
Sutherland, the study's lead researcher. "This means that scientists
don't really know how human DNA is affected by the most numerous
particles in space and, as a result, do not know how to design the
proper protection for astronauts."

Terribly sorry about all of that pesky radiation on behalf of open
space travels, that which hasn't even a pesky gamma/Xray saturated
moon to deal with. Too bad the honest laws of physics and of our best
available science still can not be applied to anything NASA/Apollo.
(must be another Yiddish thing)

BTW, how the heck was all of that photon sensitive Kodak film modified
for being so unusually rad-hard and even somehow thermally immune as
well as immune to the spectrums of violet and the near-blue of
secondary UV energy?
- Brad Guth