[Talisker]

Moon temperatures swing wildly from sun to shade by over four hundred degrees, =/- ~200 degrees F.

The cameras were unshielded metal. The film was held rolled in a metal carrier with metal framing plates. The solar radiation hit the outer metal camera frame, heating it. Convection carried the heat to the film, heating it. The reverse happened instantaneously in the shade, freezing everything. The film should be a melted/cracked, brittle mess, completely unable to roll smoothly across the frame and then be re-rolled on the other side. In addition, the photographic emulsion should be trashed from the extreme heating and cooling, badly fogged at best.

Yet none of this happened. The photos were perfect. I used to do darkroom work in the olden days. And so I know that if you do the same thing in the desert or the snow, if you don’t insulate your camera and shield it from the sun or the cold, it you don’t keep your film packs in coolers or a heated car, as necessary, then you’re work is toast - fogged garbage on cracked or melted film.

So I’d love to know how NASA pulled off this technical miracle on the moon - I really would.

[ansel12]

Read what this guy has to say about the camera and film.

http://www.clavius.org/envheat.html

and this one.

http://sterileeye.com/2009/07/23/the-apollo-11-hasselblad-cameras/

[Lazamataz]

There is one solid way to know for sure: Our LEM module left behind it's landing gear, several of them, and a decent telescope should be able to see that. A really good telescope should see that, the flag, and footprints.

Like this:

[GingisK]

The cameras were unshielded metal.

Not true. The cameras were encased in a special enclosure. Have you ever seen an underwater enclosure for cameras?