Introduction
As part of my continuing series on the Apollo Moon Hoax, I am going to address a fairly common claim of all the Apollo photos being too good to be true. I’ll be writing a related post soon about the related claim dealing with how the astronauts actually took the photos (exposure settings, focusing, aiming, etc.).
All posts in this series:
- The Apollo Moon Hoax: An Overview
- The Apollo Moon Hoax: Why Haven’t Any Pictures Been Taken of the Landing Sites?
- The Apollo Moon Hoax: There Is a “Prop Rock” Labeled with a “C” (Updated)
- The Apollo Moon Hoax: Huge, Deadly Temperature Variation Claims
- The Apollo Moon Hoax: “No Stars” Claim and an Explanation of Dynamic Range
- The Apollo Moon Hoax: How Could the Astronauts Take So Many Photographs?
- The Apollo Moon Hoax: Why Is There No Blast Crater Under the Lunar Module?
- The Apollo Moon Hoax: Why Is There No Lunar Dust on the Lander’s Footpads?
- The Apollo Moon Hoax: Footprints Need Water to Form, Right? And How Hoaxers Argue
- The Apollo Moon Hoax: All the Photos Are Way Too Good!
The Claim
This is a pretty common Apollo moon hoax claim, and it was featured towards the beginning of the 2001 FOX docudrama. The basic premise shown during that TV special where they quote Bill Kaysings: “The pictures that we see that were allegedly taken on the moon are absolutely perfect.”
Another version, this time from Ralph Rene: “All the photographs brought back from the moon are correctly exposed, correctly framed, and crisply in focus. This seems suspicious.”
Is This True?
In a word: No.
What’s humorous about this claim in this this day and age is that it is demonstrably false given a computer, the internet, and less than 5 minutes. You can go to any number of websites that archive all the Apollo photographs and see quite plainly, for yourself, that many of the pictures, in a word, SUCK.
The Project Apollo Image Gallery is one of my favorite. I clicked randomly on the Apollo 12 mission. I clicked on three photos, in a row, selecting the position at random. One was good (AS12-46-6821), one was framed poorly with the horizon going down at around a 20° angle while photographing the astronaut’s butt (AS12-46-6820), and the third showed a lens flare of ghosting around the astronaut (AS12-46-6818).
And then there’s the one I’m showing below, AS12-47-7010. The label on the picture is, “Reflection of astronaut.” Quite, um, interesting, but hardly a “perfect,” “correctly exposed,” “correctly framed,” nor even “crisply in focus” photograph.

Bad Apollo Photograph - AS12-47-7010
Why the Claim?
So that bears the question as to why this claim even exists if it’s so demonstrably wrong? The answer is that it’s really cheap to duplicate images these days (17¢ at Costco!!) or to place them online in a digital archive. But back in the 1960s and ’70s, that was not the case. It was expensive to print up images, and it took quite a bit of time.
Since this entire Apollo program was a massive public relations campaign – not only to the American public but to the rest of the world – NASA only released the best of the photographs. After all, of the literally thousands of photographs from the Apollo missions, it simply does not make sense for a press office to release all of them, rather they would want to control the release and only put out the best ones.
And not only that, but ones that may have been cropped and rotated to make them the best … but that’s an issue to address on a separate hoax proponent claim.
Final Thoughts
This claim is, in my opinion, one of the silliest that’s out there. It may seem like a good one, but literally any amount of effort to look into it will show that it’s simply wrong. This is a case of anomaly hunting where there isn’t even any anomaly.

Hi Stuart,
Thank you for your work in this blog at addressing some of the claims in the Apollo Moon Hoax.
You were quoted in an CNN article online, and I just wanted to point out what I think is a logical fallacy in your comment.
The CNN article is available here:
http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/space/07/17/moon.landing.hoax/index.html
Specifically, I refer to:
“But Stuart Robbins, a Ph.D. candidate in astrophysics at the University of Colorado who gives lectures defending NASA from Apollo hoax theorists, believes their influence can be harmful.
“If people don’t think we were able to go to the moon, then they don’t believe in the ingenuity of human achievement,” he said. “Going to the moon and returning astronauts safely back to Earth is arguably one of the most profound achievements in human history, and so when people simply believe it was a hoax, they lose out on that shared experience and doubt what humans can do.” ”
In the context of your comments, the link between (1) not believing in humans being able to go to the moon and (2) not believing in the ingenuity of human achievement does not seem to have a place in a scientific discussion, or an impassioned examination of the evidence we have of moon landings.
I do realize media reports are limited, so I can only say so much based on what I read on CNN.
Good luck with your work, and keep up your good effort!
Comment by CF — July 17, 2009 @ 7:53 am |
Thanks. The quote was taken somewhat out of context (unsurprisingly). Among other questions, the reporter specifically asked me: “Are these conspiracy theorists just harmless wackos, or do their books, films, etc., have a negative impact on public perceptions about space exploration? Do these people do our astronauts a disservice by undermining their accomplishments?”
So it wasn’t a response to a scientific question — I gave him plenty of other information about the science in response to his other questions, but like the Florida Today reporter, this one failed to use any of it and just went for one of the “softer” parts of my response.
Comment by astrostu206265 — July 17, 2009 @ 8:25 am |
I am not sure what to believe really. But in one of your other explanations about the conspiracy theorists claim that the number of photographs taken was too high to be reasonable, you made the case that with the two astronauts taking photos as well as multiple shots taken quickly from a single position, makes it far less unreasonable than the conspiracy theorists claims. However, if by your explanation above that NASA only released the “good” shots and that due to the mobility limitations of the camera, there were surely a lot of “bad” photos that were not processed, doesn’t this again bring into question about the “reasonableness” of the number of photos taken in the time the astronauts were on the moon?
Comment by John — July 17, 2009 @ 1:15 pm |
John – No, it doesn’t. The claim of the number of photographs deals with ALL the photos taken from Apollo, not just the ones initially released to the media. I honestly don’t know how many were initially released, but I would guess no more than a few dozen from each mission. This is a relatively small number of the total number that were taken, and I’m sure that the total number was known at the time.
Comment by astrostu206265 — July 17, 2009 @ 1:25 pm |
Thanks.
Comment by John — July 17, 2009 @ 1:31 pm
why is it people are so easily fooled by the magician that steals souls with the evil black box? If you only knew how many frames get wasted to capture that one properly exposed, correctly oriented and perfectly cropped image that actually means something… of course, in these days of digital it’s hard to appreciate what it once took to get a good shot by someone like Brady or Stieglitz or Adams.
Comment by danish — July 18, 2009 @ 4:32 am |
I’m actually surprised they were able to get even one decent picture! with the camera being strapped to their chest, one can only wonder what a professional photographer would’ve picked up.
I think this is all bogus… Nothing did actually happen, back then it was only a matter of who’s showing more muscle, the Americans or the Soviets… When Sputnik was launched, the Americans crapped themselves, “we cannot allow the soviets to have lunar rocket launching capabilities”… riiiiight! like I understand people are stupid and ignorance is the weapon to control the masses but it eludes how silly people were to believe this nonsense! Soooo they cooked up this whole “We went to the Moon” production at NASA, which was run by ex-Nazi officials who were smuggled into the states after WWII as the main rocket scientist. The Saturn V rockets were also a flop, their minuscule size wouldn’t have been enough to get to the moon. Which brings me to another point, the MASSIVE “investment” (some 40 Billion $) into the Apollo program had to “yield” results or else the American public, not to mention the whole world watching, would practically come down on NASA like wildfire for it’s incompetency and failure.
Another main point that has yet to be proven; how did they manage to cross the Van Allen radiation belt without getting hurt or dying – not to mention develop cancers – when every animal the now-Russians and Chinese sent into space died horribly also not to mention their own astronauts’ suffering.
my 2 cents,
Fredo The Freedom Fighter
Comment by Fredo — July 29, 2009 @ 6:31 am |