3 ms·
So this wasn't just rolling shutter?
by ClassyJacket 3y ago
So this wasn't just rolling shutter?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- rjeli 3y agoNo, the difference is too large for it to be rolling shutter. (not sure if the rolling shutter is even vertical or horizontal). It seems like it takes a short video and stitches together the sections with the least motion blur in each frame.
- tmalsburg2 3y agoRolling shutter could in principle explain this, but it’s probably too fast to capture these three poses which must be temporally rather far apart.
- stephen_g 3y agoNot probably too fast - definitely too fast. Rolling shutter occurs over a single read-out of the sensor, so she'd have to have held all the three poses during the 1/100th of a second or so exposure for it to be possibly related to rolling shutter.
- tmalsburg2 3y agoCompletely valid nitpick.
- vlovich123 3y agoNo. Rolling shutter should typically be too fast for a shot like that. Much more likely it's a result of 3 photos taken at slightly different times and automatically composited. Appears to be a well known effect.
- kag0 3y agoNo. A rolling shutter deals with different parts of the sensor being exposed at different times within one frame. It generally requires a much faster object (think airplane propeller or light with PWM). This is effectively multiple frames captured normally and a mistake in the algorithm stitching them into one frame.