3 ms·

Literally the same millisecond (according to timestamps), or ‘only’ the same tenth of a second or so (as demonstrated by the pictures being near identical)? Th

by comex 9y ago

Literally the same millisecond (according to timestamps), or ‘only’ the same tenth of a second or so (as demonstrated by the pictures being near identical)? Those would both be unlikely and remarkable events, but one is 100 times more unlikely than the other :)

aidenn0 9y ago
Timestamps are not useful for this since the cameras clocks are likely off by more than a millisecond. I think a millisecond is too strong of a claim, but it's almost certainly much less than 1/10th of a second. (a simple though experiment that you could turn into a real experiment if you have a camera: If you take a 1/10th second exposure of something like this the magnitude of the motion blur will be much greater than the differences between the wave shapes on the two cameras).
- carlmr 9y ago
  So if two people are shooting in burst mode, and both have an overlap in their shooting burst of say 2 seconds with 5 images per second. Then the chances is already (2 * 5)/1000 to land a picture in the same millisecond. You'd expect in 100 burst of pictures taken like this for one to be taken at the same millisecond. It's not that unlikely. What's more unlikely is that they selected the same shot and found out about it. This probably happens multiple times every day, just by virtue of the billions of people in the world taking a photo every day.
ggg9990 9y ago
No more than 1/100s apart.
- nwellnhof 9y ago
  My guess is that the water doesn't move much faster than 10 m/s which translates to 1 cm/ms. You certainly can't make out 1 cm differences in the images, so the "same millisecond" claim is definitely exaggerated. From a quick look, the time difference could even be more than 10 ms, but not by much.
ralfd 9y ago
In the vimeo video he shows the other burst shots in Lightroom. A tenth of a second before/after is noticeably different.
mxfh 9y ago
The time frame in question doesn't seem that big. There were probably not that much large breakers and the they both chose the peak of one with the best conditions. So maybe a 1:100 to 1:10.000 chance. I'm more amazed, that they went down the whole photoshop route before comparing angles. If someone had that kind of skill in retouching, he wouldn't need to copy photos to make a living. The foreground wave is definitely from a noticably different angle, but still the same scene, even the white caps in the far background look very different. You don't need a high res image for that, only, when cropped to the lighthouse only.

by comex 9y ago

aidenn0 9y ago

Timestamps are not useful for this since the cameras clocks are likely off by more than a millisecond. I think a millisecond is too strong of a claim, but it's almost certainly much less than 1/10th of a second. (a simple though experiment that you could turn into a real experiment if you have a camera: If you take a 1/10th second exposure of something like this the magnitude of the motion blur will be much greater than the differences between the wave shapes on the two cameras).

carlmr 9y ago
So if two people are shooting in burst mode, and both have an overlap in their shooting burst of say 2 seconds with 5 images per second. Then the chances is already (2 * 5)/1000 to land a picture in the same millisecond. You'd expect in 100 burst of pictures taken like this for one to be taken at the same millisecond. It's not that unlikely. What's more unlikely is that they selected the same shot and found out about it. This probably happens multiple times every day, just by virtue of the billions of people in the world taking a photo every day.

ggg9990 9y ago

No more than 1/100s apart.

nwellnhof 9y ago
My guess is that the water doesn't move much faster than 10 m/s which translates to 1 cm/ms. You certainly can't make out 1 cm differences in the images, so the "same millisecond" claim is definitely exaggerated. From a quick look, the time difference could even be more than 10 ms, but not by much.

ralfd 9y ago

In the vimeo video he shows the other burst shots in Lightroom. A tenth of a second before/after is noticeably different.

mxfh 9y ago

The time frame in question doesn't seem that big. There were probably not that much large breakers and the they both chose the peak of one with the best conditions. So maybe a 1:100 to 1:10.000 chance. I'm more amazed, that they went down the whole photoshop route before comparing angles. If someone had that kind of skill in retouching, he wouldn't need to copy photos to make a living. The foreground wave is definitely from a noticably different angle, but still the same scene, even the white caps in the far background look very different. You don't need a high res image for that, only, when cropped to the lighthouse only.