Refresh Comments
Anonymous comments allowed.
8 comments displayed.
#3
-
anon (12/16/2015) [-]
First guy is an Idiot, just buy one of those cameras that record for super slow mo - like 1000 frames per second.
Could have saved him 4199 hours of his life.
Could have saved him 4199 hours of his life.
#80 to #3
-
anon (12/17/2015) [-]
I'm surprised that no one with experience in photography commented on this one, seeing how there could be some on FJ.
In case you were serious about that comment, it is not as simple as that, even if we leave out that slowmo cams cost in the range of 10Ks to 100Ks $.
The other limitation to cameras and high-speed photography is bandwidth. in Professional photography, DSLR to be exact, we can easily assume a 20 MP camera. In high-speed photography, in which you need few consecutive photos, you don't have time to compress them, so you have to take them in RAW format. Note that pro photographers would be using RAW anyway, as JPEG will result in a lesser quality photos.
Raw means that for every pixel we need 3 bytes. For a 20 MP sensor the part of the camera that actually takes the photo; the "retina" of the camera, if you will. that translates to a 60 MBytes picture. That's ONE frame. It would take 29.3 GB to record for 5 seconds. That's ~47 Gbps. Do you know how many HDD and SSDs (Or RAM) to record for 5 seconds? Not to mention the power requirements.
Imagine having a studio that you have to take out with you there every time. In addition to being able to point the camera exactly at the location were the bird would dive.
Now, it is still feasible and might be less hectic than shooting for 6 years. Only problem with the specs mentioned, even though there are cameras www.highspeedcameras.com/Products/Ultrahigh-Speed-Cameras/v2512 capable of 25 Gpx/s, which is just enough to do 20 MP @1K FPS, the available sensor is only 1 MP sensor, vs 20 MP for pro photography.
Tl;dr. It is theoretically possible, could have been hectic either ways, but there's no current product that can do it.
In case you were serious about that comment, it is not as simple as that, even if we leave out that slowmo cams cost in the range of 10Ks to 100Ks $.
The other limitation to cameras and high-speed photography is bandwidth. in Professional photography, DSLR to be exact, we can easily assume a 20 MP camera. In high-speed photography, in which you need few consecutive photos, you don't have time to compress them, so you have to take them in RAW format. Note that pro photographers would be using RAW anyway, as JPEG will result in a lesser quality photos.
Raw means that for every pixel we need 3 bytes. For a 20 MP sensor the part of the camera that actually takes the photo; the "retina" of the camera, if you will. that translates to a 60 MBytes picture. That's ONE frame. It would take 29.3 GB to record for 5 seconds. That's ~47 Gbps. Do you know how many HDD and SSDs (Or RAM) to record for 5 seconds? Not to mention the power requirements.
Imagine having a studio that you have to take out with you there every time. In addition to being able to point the camera exactly at the location were the bird would dive.
Now, it is still feasible and might be less hectic than shooting for 6 years. Only problem with the specs mentioned, even though there are cameras www.highspeedcameras.com/Products/Ultrahigh-Speed-Cameras/v2512 capable of 25 Gpx/s, which is just enough to do 20 MP @1K FPS, the available sensor is only 1 MP sensor, vs 20 MP for pro photography.
Tl;dr. It is theoretically possible, could have been hectic either ways, but there's no current product that can do it.
