This month marks the 50th anniversary of when man first set foot on the moon when Apollo 11 landed at the Sea of Tranquillity on July 20 1969.
It is one of the most iconic and memorable moments in the history of mankind but is commonly beleaguered with outlandish claims it was an elaborate ruse.
Astronauts and academics marvel at the incredulity of the claims and Howard Berry, head of post-production and programme leader for MA Film and Television Production at the University of Hertfordshire penned an article for The Conversation debunking the most common myths.
Scroll down for video
Astronaut Edwin (Buzz) Aldrin, the lunar module pilot, walks on the surface of the moon near the leg of the Lunar Module 'Eagle' during Apollo 11's first manned lunar landing on July 20, 1969
It's been half a century since the magnificent Apollo 11 moon landing, yet many people still don't believe it actually happened.
Conspiracy theories about the event dating back to the 1970s are in fact more popular than ever.
A common theory is that film director Stanley Kubrick helped NASA fake the historic footage of its six successful moon landings.
But would it really have been possible to do that with the technology available at the time? I'm not a space travel expert, an engineer or a scientist.
I am a filmmaker and lecturer in film post-production, and – while I can't say how we landed on the moon in 1969 – I can say with some certainty that the footage would have been impossible to fake.
Here are some of the most common beliefs and questions – and why they don't hold up.
Conspiracy theories about the event dating back to the 1970s are in fact more popular than ever. A common theory is that film director Stanley Kubrick (pictured)helped NASA fake the historic footage of its six successful moon landings
This NASA photo taken by Neil Armstrong on July 20, 1969 shows astronaut Buzz Aldrin on the Moon's Sea of Tranquility. It is one of the most iconic events in the history of mankind but is commonly beleaguered with claims it was an elaborate ruse
There are two different ways of capturing moving images. One is film, actual strips of photographic material onto which a series of images are exposed.
Another is video, which is an electronic method of recording onto various mediums, such as moving magnetic tape. With video, you can also broadcast to a television receiver.
A standard motion picture film records images at 24 frames per second, while broadcast television is typically either 25 or 30 frames, depending on where you are in the world.
If we go along with the idea that the moon landings were taped in a TV studio, then we would expect them to be 30 frames per second video, which was the television standard at the time.
However, we know that video from the first moon landing was recorded at ten frames per second in SSTV (Slow Scan television) with a special camera.
Apollo Lunar Television Camera, as it was mounted on the side of the Apollo 11 Lunar Module when it telecasted Armstrong’s ‘One small step’. Howard Berry from the University of Hertfordshire reveals how the landing cold not have been faked
Some people may contend that when you look at people moving in slow motion, they appear to be in a low gravity environment.
Slowing down film requires more frames than usual, so you start with a camera capable of capturing more frames in a second than a normal one – this is called overcranking.
When this is played back at the normal frame rate, this footage plays back for longer. If you can't overcrank your camera, but you record at a normal frame rate, you can instead artificially slow down the footage, but you need a way to store the frames and generate new extra frames to slow it down.
At the time of the broadcast, magnetic disk recorders capable of storing slow motion footage could only capture 30 seconds in total, for a playback of 90 seconds of slow motion video.
To capture 143 minutes in slow motion, you'd need to record and store 47 minutes of live action, which simply wasn't possible.'They could have had an advanced storage recorder to create slow motion footage. Everyone knows NASA gets the tech before the public.'
Well, maybe they did have a super secret extra storage recorder – but one almost 3,000 times more advanced? Doubtful.'They shot it on film and slowed down the film instead. You can have as much film as you like to do this. Then they converted the film to be