3 ms·

Very inventive, electronics makes things so much easier. It reminds me of the high speed mechanical cameras used in the 1950s Atomic tests that can take 200K

Very inventive, electronics makes things so much easier. It reminds me of the high speed mechanical cameras used in the 1950s Atomic tests that can take 200K - 10M images per second (although not for very long). https://collection.sciencemuseumgroup.org.uk/objects/co8358474/c4-rotating-mirror-high-speed-camera-bolted-to-rectangular-wheeled-steel-frame-wheels-missing-high-speed-camera https://collection.sciencemuseumgroup.org.uk/objects/co83584... https://gizmodo.com/filming-monster-atomic-blasts-requires-monster-cameras-1688878679 https://gizmodo.com/filming-monster-atomic-blasts-requires-m... > At these high framing rates the recorded event must be illuminated by an intense source of light. Just like an atomic flash during the first milliseconds of a nuclear bomb test

dylan604 4y ago
aside from the light requirements, how long does it take to roll out a 1000' of film at those frame rates? at 24fps, that's typically 10-12 minutes. 200,000 / 24 = 8,333x faster. 10min x 60s = 600s / 8333 = 0.07s i'm guessing the military could afford to have a different type of film load than standard motion picture film rolls, but that's still ridiculously fast at 200k fps so maybe 10M fps qualifies for ludicrously fast. what fps would need to be achieved before the picture just goes plaid?
teaearlgraycold 4y ago
I love when a difficult engineering task has a built in solution to a sub-problem. You want to capture an image of a nuclear blast immediately after the explosion for only a minuscule time slice. That means you’re worried about getting a viable exposure because the film’s only under light for microseconds. Solution: nuclear bombs are really fucking bright.