Chinese moon pictures retouched

No one removes the stars fool. It's black. There is no atmosphere (air to you, cretin) to scatter light, so inbetween looking at objects it's very dark.

And when you image an object the gradient in contrast and brightness is so great that the stars don't get imaged because the cameras have to stop down so much to not wash out the image of what is being photographed. 

And if you actually looked at the real time imagery from the shuttle and the ISS of the ships and astronauts working during orbital night you often do see stars drift by.

Or as my daddy used to point out, don't argue with a fool, it makes it difficult for people to tell who is who.

Not "lead". That would be either the present tense or a metal.

"This *led* the mission's chief scientist, Ouyang Ziyuan, (to claim?) that the Chinese had discovered a new crater which did not appear on the US imagery."

In response to the post above the reason you can't see the stars in space is that you're basically in daylight and the light from the sun, directly and indirectly reflecting from the earth, moon and spacecraft close down the iris so you can't see them. A long exposure would show them but anything else would be completely overexposed.
It's one of the lame arguments supporting the theory of a faked moon landing but think about it, in daytime on the moon they were basically in a very bright sunny day, the sky is black because there is no atmosphere but it's still daytime and the camera is set to photograph very brightly lit objects, the stars are there but completely underexposed and invisible.
Glennser

>zupakomputer

they don't have stars on their moon pictures, because you have to use a very short exposure time on the moon. The moon is VERY bright. So you don't get stars.- Try it at home. Make a photo of the sky with a very short or standard 'daylight' exposure time. No stars.

Always fun to slam China, isn't it? Well, it works best when you have your facts straight. Photo stitching isn't done by a bunch of people sitting around drawing in craters on photoshop. There are photo stitching tools. I've used them extensively myself (I'm a Hugin user, personally) to make massive landscape photos (hundreds of megapixels) from many shots taken by my 6MP camera. Nowadays, you don't even have to tell it what parts of the image match up to what other parts; it can figure that out on its own. The difference between blending shots and not blending shots? A checkbox. That's it. The software does all of the work for you. NASA does the exact same thing. Photos for scientific use don't have the edges blended, to make it clear where one shot stops and the next one begins. Photos for public release generally have them blended to make them look prettier. And the only difference is a checkbox.

There was no, and I mean absolute no ill will or deviousness required for this mistake. If you knew more about what you were talking about, you'd understand that. But hey, can't miss a chance to bash other people's hard work, now can you?

By the way -- these sorts of errors -- called "parallax errors" -- are rather tricky beasts. I have a number of stitches with parallax errors in them, to my chagrin, because I don't have a panoramic head for my mount. To understand parallax errors, move your head close to a narrow vertical object (a pole, a speaker, a lamp, whatever),and close your right eye. Now open your right eye and close your left. Notice how the speaker moves relative to its background? That's a parallax error. If you eyes were cameras and had taken photos of what you saw, those images wouldn't be able to be stitched together without problems. Well, Chang'e is orbiting the moon at high velocity, grabbing strips of images as it goes. Mountains and crater ridges will appear to move relative to one another depending on where the shot is taken. This can make it difficult for a stitcher to line up properly.

Damn Hippies!

These folks that airbrush or digitally paint out the skies in all outer space footage and images - except those taken from telescopes like the Hubble - since when is being a bit good with photoshop or some such an ok for having National Security Clearance?

I really don't see how anyone can become that confused from seeing there are stars and other celestial objects visible from outer space, so why remove them from every single image and film? We can see them from Earth, even in cities on clear nights, so it's hardly a big shock. I'm sure the atmosphere doesn't act like that much of a focusing lens that once outside of it, no stars and no galaxies are visible.

It's also worrying when you hear people, say like astronauts, who have been up there make comments like "the blackness of space" - really? So just the Sun and the Moon and the Earth and you can't see anything else at all?

Love the last paragraph. Had a good laugh on that one!

No one landed on the moon, be it US or China!!!!!!!!!!!!