The point is that there are 'stars' in these photos and there is a bright body in the foreground which makes it difficult to explain why there are none in a lot of other photos.
If the film and cameras are so bad that they cannot adjust for both (which is how it is 'officially' explained) then how come this image has detail in both bright and dark areas?
I assumed that the Flat Black is artificial. But perhaps not. Could be a difference by exposure or film speed. Not an expert here but in this subjective context of off world anomalies "the sky's the limit".
We have discussed this so many times on this forum, but normally it is within threads as part of another topic, so I would like to start a thread about this.
It is one of the things I still cannot understand - why there are some stars in some space images and not in others. (usually more recent images)
People have tried to explain to me, in technical terms, why there are no stars shown in some photos, and often it is apparently due to exposure and how there is a bright object in the picture and the film cannot cope with such a broad range of light conditions. It cannot capture the detail in the bright areas without losing some detail in the dark areas. And.. visa-versa.
Now, however, thanks to our member Dave on another thread, I will offer this Apollo 8 image which has both areas of bright Moon surface AND some 'star-like' things showing in the dark areas of space.