First picture on moon?
81334
There was no photographer on the moon. NASA says the camera was a camera on an arm attached to the spacecraft that was deployed shortly before landing. The camera was also used by the crew of the lander to see the approaching moon to help them land.
254659
In 1990 the  Voyager 1 spacecraft took the first ever photograph of our Solar System. At that time, Voyager 1 was 4-billion miles from Earth.\n\nThis website has the photos -->http://www.solarviews.com/raw/misc/vgr_fam1.gif\n\nP.S.\nI don't know what Thai Mai Xhu has been smoking, but I sure want some :)
937717
A lot.  Only 1% or less of the light actually makes the image.  This is why digital photography is so much better when it comes to astronomy.
670809
I love astronomy. So try nasa.com and look for astronomy picture of the day and it will show you every picture from all the way back to 1996 to today. It's so cool.
136889
Its an illusion.  Its because the moon is closer to objects to which you can compare it.
203410
Hi. This is a good question...sort of.  Unless you have a little bit of experience with photography, you might not understand lighting and shutter speed selection.  Sunlight reflecting off the lunar surface and nearby objects is much more intense than starlight. If you think about taking a picture at night here on earth you have to adjust the shutter speed for what you are  imaging.  If you have a camera that does this automatically, it will likely select the object closest to the center of the frame and adjust the shutter speed for that object.  If you want to get star images you'll have to mount your camera on a tripod and let the shutter remain open longer. If the astronauts did this, the objects in the foreground would be extremely overexposed and wash out the entire image.  If you are asking this to determine whether the Moon Landing was a hoax, you'll need a much better question.  See the source below for a better explanation and for answers to more of the ridiculous claims that Hoax supporters have made. To learn more about astrophotography see the second link.
13214
No the resolution is not high enough but nasa is planning a satellite to orbit the moon that can take very close up pics and show where they are.
444891
Tomorrow, 4/13/06.  At least according to my calendar.  We cannot see the moon here as we have had rain for about six weeks straight.  I would love to see it!!
850398
the moon is not a star
900864
i have some of the moon
687844
Pictures from low orbit were taken by the Russian and American astronauts in the early 60's.\n\nBut the most impressive picture was taken in 1968 by the Apollo 8 astronauts: the first  photograph of the Earth from deep space.\n\nhttp://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap051224.html
28161
THE OTHER SIDE OF THE MOON.
48626
First Sun. in Aug.  Aug. 6, 2006
751620
You mean, what color is the sky on the moon?  No color, or black.  The moon doesn't have an atmosphere.
217005
as it is not possible to post pics i would assume that u understand\n1.Since the Moon has only one light source, the Sun, the shadows must be in line. But in this cases, it looks as if there are multiple light sources in moon, which is not possible.\n \n2.The foreground of many images of the astronauts on the Moon are filled in with light, while the shadows remain absolutely black, again proving that there are multiple light sources. \n\n3.There are no stars in the background from pictures taken on the Moon. \n\n4.In some images, a huge light source can be seen reflected in the astronaut's visors. This has to be a very bright, nearby source. There  is no possibility of external light source in moon\n\n5.How could NASA take TV images of the LM ascending on Apollo 15, 16, and 17 if there was no one on the Lunar surface to man the camera? \n\n6.There can't be any pictures taken on the Moon because the film would melt in the 250° temperatures. Any  film exposed to 250° would indeed melt at that temperature\n\n7.The LM engine was very powerful. How come it did not leave a crater below the spacecraft? Why didn't it kick up any dust when it landed?\n\n8.The footprints left by the astronauts are proof that the Moon landings are fake. This one is also essentially a two pronged argument. First, the Fox show charged that the LM engine was so powerful that the upper layer of dust should have been blown away around the LM, so there should not be any footprints. Others have charged that the footprints should not be there since in the absence of water as a bonding agent, they should not maintain coherent shapes and sharp outlines\n\n9.There is no dust on LM footpads. -- According to Kaysing and Fox, this is the strongest evidence that the Moon landings are faked. They allege that with the swirling dust from LM descent engine, the foot pads should be covered with dust\n\n10.The pictures below show that flags are waving. And they never will. The flag was on the airless Moon, just as we all knew\n\nTHERE ARE MANY MORE ISSUES ON THIS, \n\nBUT \n\nTHOSE ARE TOO TECHNICAL FOR US. \n\n  \n\n…..NEIL ARMSTRONG WAS NOT THE FIRST PERSON TO LAND ON MOON\n\ncheck the refrences on these sites
736038
Would you like to see a real picture that was recently made of the beginning of the Universe?\n\nhttp://www.princeton.edu/pr/pwb/03/0217/
69261
There are five retro-reflectors on the moon. The first web site shows their location on the moon. The second give more exact coordinates.