2 ms·
I question the exact same millisecond part. There’s zero proof of that (and actually counter proof examining the photos). Same second, sure. Same millisecond, I
by jsjohnst 9y ago
I question the exact same millisecond part. There’s zero proof of that (and actually counter proof examining the photos). Same second, sure. Same millisecond, I think someone is reaching a bit much to make a story.
- ghaff 9y agoAs I said in another comment, I'm pretty sure "same millisecond" is being used by the photographer in the sense of "same instant" or "same moment in time" not literally same millisecond based on a super-accurate time source. That information does not exist in the photo's EXIF data which is one-second resolution and typically derives from a manual time/date setting in the camera's menu.
- jsjohnst 9y agoI am not taking issue with the author of the post as I agree, that is likely the intent. But folks here seem to be parroting it as fact rather than taking the liberty you and I seemed to do.
- ghaff 9y agoThat's true. I also think many of the readers of this site tend to take terms like "millisecond" literally and at face value :-)