3 ms·
Right, which is why the researchers were reliant on video artifacts caused by the rolling shutter effect. Even at NTSC resolution, that could get you 262.5 scan
by zeta0134 8y ago
Right, which is why the researchers were reliant on video artifacts caused by the rolling shutter effect. Even at NTSC resolution, that could get you 262.5 scanlines per frame at 60 FPS (525 at ~29.75 FPS, because of interlacing... NTSC is complicated), which could potentially get you ~15 KHz as a baseline sample rate, depending on how prominent the rolling shutter effect actually is for that image sensor, and how much of the frame your vibrating object consumes vertically. This isn't perfect and would require all sorts of calibration, but I could see it being used to recover windows of time at much higher sample rates, and make inferences about the inbetween data with some FFT analysis on what you recovered.
Basically, it's more the rate of _scanlines_ that matters for this technique, and the quality of the image sensor used. The rate of full frames isn't the limiter.