10 ms·

I've never seen such hype. Does anyone actually think "the possibilities are endless," that this device "is a prankster's dream" and "could destroy photography"

I've never seen such hype. Does anyone actually think "the possibilities are endless," that this device "is a prankster's dream" and "could destroy photography"? I am skeptical of the physics described but since I'm not a digicam expert I will just have to trust von Bismarck solved an apparent latency problem. (When my digicam flashes, the fulgerator has to receive that input and respond with its own flash, all before my shutter closes.) Ambient and direct lighting would both have to be below normal daytime levels and the subject needs to be dark enough to contrast the fulgerator's light. I wish this guy all the luck due a man caught adulterating vacation photos but I don't see how he has developed a viable tool. Maybe if I followed his über optics hack, I'd understand the secret implications of his toy.

gaius 18y ago
"(When my digicam flashes, the fulgerator has to receive that input and respond with its own flash, all before my shutter closes" This really isn't a problem. People have been using on-camera flashes to trigger studio lighting for decades now. A flash is actually between 1/700 and 1/2500 seconds long, which is plenty of time for the electronics to react. You shutter is probably going to be open between 1/60 and 1/250 seconds (if you're on P mode). You can see this at nearly any wedding you go to, the pro photographer might have some studio lights set up for the formals, unless he's using fancy radio triggers, his lights can be set off by guests with cameras.