There are a few factors at play here:

1. The earth is really bright, so the exposure required to photograph it can make the moon appear darker.

2. The surface of the moon is pretty dark to begin with.

3. This satellite is stationed at L1, which is about 3 times as far away from the moon as we are! Physics tells us that the moon would appear to have 1/9 the brightness.

Moon is closer to the sun than Earth, but in the grand scale of the solar system, it's only slightly closer, whilst being significantly less reflective.

Water reflects light quite well.

Like I said, the moon's albedo is much lower than Earth's. As such, it's not as reflective, and the spotlight effect isn't really noticeable.

These are generated images. That is why is seems slightly off. What could they be hiding about our plane of existence? Hmm....getting warmer.

You've misunderstood me. That satellite is 3 times as far from the moon as Earth is from the moon. In other words, satellite-moon distance is three times the earth-moon distance. As such, the moon is 1/9 the brightness for the satellite.

The earth is brighter than the moon for two reasons:

1. It's a lot bigger, in terms of surface area.
2. Earth's albedo (the percentage of solar light it reflects back into space) is, on average, 0.3. For the moon, it's around 0.12 (less than half the Earth's).

I'm not entirely convinced on the moon stuff but this gif looks like the moon doesn't have good contrast compared to the earth. It seems obvious to anyone who's used photoshop before. Perhaps the surface is just dark?

The moon is blurred because each frame of the clip is composed of 3 separate single color photographs over a 30 second exposure. The 3 photographs are then combined to create a single full color frame.

This method results in the best images of Earth, which the satellite is designed to image. But it gets blurred when imaging the moon, since it is moving faster across the image then what the camera is designed to correct for. It is obviously not designed to image the Moon, since the moon traversing the cameras field of view is a pretty rare occurence.

You also can see that the leading edge of the moon has a green outline, caused by the green exposure happening last, so it doesn't match up properly.

Richard Hoagland, Curator of Astronomy and Space Science at the Springfield Science Museum, discussing NASA live now: http://tunein.com/radio/Dark-Matter-Digital-Network-s211941/

Apparently it's 4 composite pictures layered on top of each other. r/space has all the details.

I don't understand, with our vast array of technology, why this looks like a photoshopped version of space pics from 1985…

Sure is "EPIC" though… isn't it…? Yawn...

NASA = Never A Straight Answer

Straight answers are literally everywhere you look. Just because you refuse to listen to them doesn't mean they're not there. Thankfully, the world goes on quite happily whether or not you believe in it.

So you believe that NASA accidentally "taped over" 16mm film?

hint: not real.

space travel beyond a certain point is not possible. this is all fantasy.

ever wonder why we dont have moon bases yet? more exploration in space? havent been to the moon since the early 1970s? why dont we EVER see pics and see satelites floating around? no more than just a few shitty looking frames? why not hd footage? why not more footage of this stuff in general? why dont more scientists push for more space exploration, and why is it all controlled? what could they be hiding?

space travel beyond a certain point is not possible

What is this point? How far?

why dont we EVER see pics and see satelites floating around?

The ISS is a satellite. Technically the moon is a satellite, but i'll assume you meant man made satellites :P

why not hd footage?

Is 4K HD enough for you?

Back down to mere 1080

The youtube links you posted are all 'low orbit' only perspective videos. I was specifically speaking on full view of distant earth shots, as claimed in the newly released gif animation. Why not have a release of full HD video from that beautiful view. I mean, who wouldn't want to see that? Why don't we have more of these photos? Basically, we are in the year 2015, is the technology and funding and curiosity globally really that limited or rather is all of this controlled just like everything else?

1. Getting into space is expensive, and expense increases exponentially with weight.

2. Sending back full HD videos would require a huge (read: heavy) communications system to support an enormous bandwidth.

3. HD video wouldn't be exciting — at all. You could watch for hours and only notice the earth turn a tiny bit. For all intents and purposes, it would be like staring at a photograph.

4. Because of that, there is no reason a scientist would want HD video capability on a satellite of that distance. It would offer literally zero scientific advantage over a great camera (like this one) that takes a photo every couple hours.

ever wonder why we dont have moon bases yet?

Space travel is actually difficult & dangerous which is also why the Russians have not attempted to a build a moon base yet. Also, the U.S. is not flying any manned space craft.

why dont we EVER see pics and see satelites floating around?

A picture documents a moment in time instead of ongoing action.

no more than just a few shitty looking frames? why not hd footage?

Mars Curiosity has a camera that can take high-definition video at 10 frames per second.

http://mars.nasa.gov/msl/mission/instruments/cameras/mastcam/

Cameras with better performance weigh more which is an issue when mounting it on a craft where fuel is a concern.

why not more footage of this stuff in general?

Space is limited on a rover. So there is limited memory for a craft to store images & video to be sent to Earth.

Also, sending the data back to Earth is not as simple as pointing the rover's signal back to our planet.

http://mars.nasa.gov/mer/mission/comm_data.html

why dont more scientists push for more space exploration, and why is it all controlled?

Scientists do continuously push for more space exploration and politicians continuously cut their budget.

Additionally, space exploration is really expensive & risky as Elon Musk has proven. It is cost prohibitive for the average person. It also has to be controlled by an organization similar to the FAA due to concerns about launch & flight conflicts along with ozone issues.

You can see satellites go flying by at night. They reflect sunlight and if you know what you're looking for you can spot them.

While I find the manned moon missions quite dubious, I have actually seen a satellite orbiting from a mountain peak.

OP, please don't give this guy any attention. All of his questions can be — and repeatedly have been — answered. People like him continually ignore those frequent (and patient) answers and continue to yell out the questions, to make it seem as though they were never answered.