Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > "The exposures are at 1/100,000,000ths of a second"

Reply
Thread Tools

"The exposures are at 1/100,000,000ths of a second"

 
 
Mike Henley
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-14-2006

I'm back, did you miss me?

What would you shoot at such 1/100,000,000 shutter speed?

But of course, perhaps the most spectacular thing possible, an atomic
blast! The "first few fractions of an atomic bomb upon detonation".

Enjoy

http://www.rapidnewswire.com/atom.htm

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
David Dyer-Bennet
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-15-2006
"Mike Henley" <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:

> I'm back, did you miss me?
>
> What would you shoot at such 1/100,000,000 shutter speed?
>
> But of course, perhaps the most spectacular thing possible, an atomic
> blast! The "first few fractions of an atomic bomb upon detonation".


For one thing, you need something quite brightly illuminated at that
shutter speed -- especially if the T-number of the lens/shutter system
used is anywhere near where I think it would be.

> Enjoy
>
> http://www.rapidnewswire.com/atom.htm


Those pictures (I've got at least the first two in one of Edgerton's
books, too) are among the scariest things I've seen in my life.
There's something about the clean simple form of the fireball at the
various early sizes.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, <(E-Mail Removed)>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/>
RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com/> <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/>
Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/> <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/>
Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/>
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Charles
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-15-2006
On 14 Feb 2006 18:28:12 -0600, David Dyer-Bennet <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>"Mike Henley" <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>
>> I'm back, did you miss me?
>>
>> What would you shoot at such 1/100,000,000 shutter speed?
>>
>> But of course, perhaps the most spectacular thing possible, an atomic
>> blast! The "first few fractions of an atomic bomb upon detonation".

>
>For one thing, you need something quite brightly illuminated at that
>shutter speed -- especially if the T-number of the lens/shutter system
>used is anywhere near where I think it would be.
>
>> Enjoy
>>
>> http://www.rapidnewswire.com/atom.htm

>
>Those pictures (I've got at least the first two in one of Edgerton's
>books, too) are among the scariest things I've seen in my life.
>There's something about the clean simple form of the fireball at the
>various early sizes.



Google Images has a bunch
 
Reply With Quote
 
Frank ess
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-15-2006
David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
> "Mike Henley" <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>
>> I'm back, did you miss me?
>>
>> What would you shoot at such 1/100,000,000 shutter speed?
>>
>> But of course, perhaps the most spectacular thing possible, an
>> atomic
>> blast! The "first few fractions of an atomic bomb upon detonation".

>
> For one thing, you need something quite brightly illuminated at that
> shutter speed -- especially if the T-number of the lens/shutter
> system
> used is anywhere near where I think it would be.
>
>> Enjoy
>>
>> http://www.rapidnewswire.com/atom.htm

>
> Those pictures (I've got at least the first two in one of Edgerton's
> books, too) are among the scariest things I've seen in my life.
> There's something about the clean simple form of the fireball at the
> various early sizes.


"guide wires"?

"Joshua tree's"? What?

I don't want to look at "About Us". They might have the same college
degree I have...

Edgerton certainly taught us a great deal about what really happens.
Thank you, Doc.

--
Frank ess

 
Reply With Quote
 
Pat
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-15-2006
What I'm really impressed with is that you were able to zoom back that
quick!!

 
Reply With Quote
 
Mike Henley
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-15-2006

Pat wrote:
> What I'm really impressed with is that you were able to zoom back that
> quick!!


But of course, it's a "10 foot lens"!

 
Reply With Quote
 
Rich
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-15-2006
On 14 Feb 2006 15:09:03 -0800, "Mike Henley" <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>
>I'm back, did you miss me?
>
>What would you shoot at such 1/100,000,000 shutter speed?
>
>But of course, perhaps the most spectacular thing possible, an atomic
>blast! The "first few fractions of an atomic bomb upon detonation".
>
>Enjoy
>
>http://www.rapidnewswire.com/atom.htm


I'm not sure how they did those shots, but there have been
cameras that have used things like spinning octagonal or
multi-sided mirrors that could "flash" exposures across several
feet of filmstock in a fraction of a second. For slower (but still
fast) shooting, cameras have been equipped with high speed
motor winders that took movie film at a high rate of speed,
thousands of frames per second.
CCDs/CMOS are a problem when it comes to rapid firing as
they are limited to their read-out speeds. In order to take
images at really high speeds, you need some kind of
shutter mechanism. A spinning disk with a hole in it
and some kind of synch mechanism.
-Rich
 
Reply With Quote
 
Andy Williams
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-15-2006
Rich wrote:

> I'm not sure how they did those shots, but there have been
> cameras that have used things like spinning octagonal or
> multi-sided mirrors that could "flash" exposures across several
> feet of filmstock in a fraction of a second. For slower (but still
> fast) shooting, cameras have been equipped with high speed
> motor winders that took movie film at a high rate of speed,
> thousands of frames per second.


Mechanical devices are orders of magnitude too slow to achieve these
results. Repeat of a post to r.p.e.35mm:

Alan Browne wrote:

> Probably a high speed cine camera, eg, 1000's of frames per second with
> exposure times on the order of 1/4000 to 1/10,000


Exposure time was much less, on the order of ten nanoseconds. Google
rapatronic. Each camera took one frame. A starting point:

http://simplethinking.com/home/rapat...hotographs.htm
--
Andy Williams
 
Reply With Quote
 
Matt Clara
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-15-2006
Interesting--I posted a link to these two days ago.

--
Regards,
Matt Clara
www.mattclara.com
"Mike Henley" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) oups.com...
>
> I'm back, did you miss me?
>
> What would you shoot at such 1/100,000,000 shutter speed?
>
> But of course, perhaps the most spectacular thing possible, an atomic
> blast! The "first few fractions of an atomic bomb upon detonation".
>
> Enjoy
>
> http://www.rapidnewswire.com/atom.htm
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
Matt Clara
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-15-2006

Rich wrote:
> On 14 Feb 2006 15:09:03 -0800, "Mike Henley" <(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >I'm back, did you miss me?
> >
> >What would you shoot at such 1/100,000,000 shutter speed?
> >
> >But of course, perhaps the most spectacular thing possible, an atomic
> >blast! The "first few fractions of an atomic bomb upon detonation".
> >
> >Enjoy
> >
> >http://www.rapidnewswire.com/atom.htm

>
> I'm not sure how they did those shots, but there have been
> cameras that have used things like spinning octagonal or
> multi-sided mirrors that could "flash" exposures across several
> feet of filmstock in a fraction of a second. For slower (but still
> fast) shooting, cameras have been equipped with high speed
> motor winders that took movie film at a high rate of speed,
> thousands of frames per second.
> CCDs/CMOS are a problem when it comes to rapid firing as
> they are limited to their read-out speeds. In order to take
> images at really high speeds, you need some kind of
> shutter mechanism. A spinning disk with a hole in it
> and some kind of synch mechanism.
> -Rich


For discussion on the type of shutter used in taking these images refer
to the thread "Was this taken with a Leica?" from two days back.

--
Regards,
Matt Clara
www.mattclara.com

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Fuji does multiple exposures Bill Digital Photography 9 12-01-2003 09:41 AM
exif information and bulb exposures. (where did they put it?) (canon 300d) Karl Palsson Digital Photography 3 10-09-2003 07:01 AM
Combining exposures for increased dynamic range? Antti Heiskanen Digital Photography 41 10-07-2003 01:54 PM
Snappixx v0.50 (with longer exposures) is now out! Maurice Digital Photography 0 10-03-2003 06:35 AM
Multiple Exposures w/ DigiCams? Crash Digital Photography 3 07-12-2003 09:04 AM



Advertisments