Slow/Ultra Slow Motion and Thread

  • Thread starter rhody
  • Start date
  • #1
rhody
Gold Member
630
3
Last edited by a moderator:

Answers and Replies

  • #2
DaveC426913
Gold Member
19,372
2,878
Some seriously nice sequences. Wish I had a garage or work shop.
 
  • #3
1,039
2
Wow, that ladybug is like a transformer! I never knew that beetles had their wings under that outer shell like that. I thought they used that shell to fly!
 
  • #4
Dembadon
Gold Member
624
89
Thanks for sharing, rhody. I love slow-motion videos and could watch them for hours. My favorite is the lightning video.
 
  • #5
DaveC426913
Gold Member
19,372
2,878
Wow, that ladybug is like a transformer! I never knew that beetles had their wings under that outer shell like that. I thought they used that shell to fly!
Yeah, that was the way coolest. I watched it a half dozen times.
 
  • #6
rhody
Gold Member
630
3
QC, Dembadon, Dave,

Thanks, I hope others will contribute when they find something truly special.

BTW. Does anyone here have some serious camera gear, in the caliber near what was presented here ?

Rhody...
 
  • #7
OmCheeto
Gold Member
2,145
2,620
QC, Dembadon, Dave,

Thanks, I hope others will contribute when they find something truly special.

BTW. Does anyone here have some serious camera gear, in the caliber near what was presented here ?

Rhody...

Astro posted the following a while back.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=37MNE8tOBG4

Claims he found it via LisaB.

I liked the Phantom Flex video, as the music reminded me of retro-bullet time:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U2iiPpcwfCA
(Hard to believe that movie is 43 years old)
 
  • #8
  • #9
Andy Resnick
Science Advisor
Education Advisor
Insights Author
7,591
2,240
<snip>
This one is phenomenal.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfDoQwIAaXg&feature=related"

<snip>

This one blows me away. I mean, given that 'normal' 30 fps imaging requires about 100W of light, in order to shoot 10^6 fps requires about 3*10^6 W. I can't imagine how to do that. Does anyone know what kind of lighting is used for this stuff?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #11
fuzzyfelt
Gold Member
751
4
Amazing, thanks rhody and everyone!
 
  • #12
rhody
Gold Member
630
3
This one blows me away. I mean, given that 'normal' 30 fps imaging requires about 100W of light, in order to shoot 10^6 fps requires about 3*10^6 W. I can't imagine how to do that. Does anyone know what kind of lighting is used for this stuff?
Andy,

I did a little digging on Kurzzeit's site (English version, thank God), here is what I found for http://www.kurzzeit.com/eng/flashlight.htm" [Broken], there is a camera link too, up to 1 million FPS. It is a start.

Rhody...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #13
rhody
Gold Member
630
3
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-15383516" [Broken]

Interesting concept, according to the article begun by Russian scientist Alexander Gershun in 1936 and the capture mechanism's took off in the 1980's and 1990's. I wonder if this technology would aid in high speed photography ?
Rather than recording a single version of an image, the Lytro captures data about the intensity and direction of all the light entering its lenses.

That information can be reorganised later with the option to change which parts are blurred and which are sharp.

The "light field" technology was developed by company founder Ren Ng while he was at Stanford University.

The Lytro looks nothing like a conventional camera It is, in some ways, analogous to the practice of shooting RAW images with a current generation digital camera.

In that example, the device records all of the light falling on its sensor without running it through processes such as colour balancing or sharpening. These can be applied later on a computer.
Rhody...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #14
Andy Resnick
Science Advisor
Education Advisor
Insights Author
7,591
2,240
Andy,

I did a little digging on Kurzzeit's site (English version, thank God), here is what I found for http://www.kurzzeit.com/eng/flashlight.htm" [Broken], there is a camera link too, up to 1 million FPS. It is a start.

Rhody...

I couldn't find any information about that device- I had a hard time finding any lighting product for high speed video, but came up with this:

http://www.visinst.com/LEDLighting.html [Broken]

Which seems very reasonable, and this:

http://www.visinst.com/HIPI%20Light.htm [Broken]

which does not :)

At least the Shimadzu and Phantom have a Nikon f-mount... tee hee...

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_5tXNCI3P-...hKEyeb4Q/s400/Copyright-Gavin-Thurston2--.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #15
  • #16
AlephZero
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
6,994
293
This one blows me away. I mean, given that 'normal' 30 fps imaging requires about 100W of light, in order to shoot 10^6 fps requires about 3*10^6 W. I can't imagine how to do that. Does anyone know what kind of lighting is used for this stuff?

We haven't yet found any high speed video kit that will match mechanical high speed cameras using rotating prisms for our requirements - continuous capture 2000 frames at 10,000 FPS, resolution better than 10 MPixels. Some of the mechanical camera bodies are 20 or 30 years old, but with proper maintenance they still perform pretty much "as new".

For that speed we use about 150 to 200 kW of incandescent lighting.

In the top picture on page 3 of this http://www.rolls-royce.com/trent_1000/documents/Trent1000_Iss6.pdf [Broken] you can see some of the lighting (on the blue panels and elsewhere) for "side view" cameras, which we would describe as medium speed, i.e about 1000 FPS for several seconds.

The bottom picture shows part of the "front view" camera and lighting rig, with the lighting being checked out (at low power). The actual cameras are beyond the left hand edge of the picture, but of course there is nothing much to see from the outside except big metal boxes.

Even with a setup built as solidly as that, camera shake is still an annoyance.

Of course these days the photographic film is only used to produce high resolution digital images (at comparable resolution to the photographic grain size) - much nicer to work with than spending hours viewing scratchy copies on VHS videotape one frame at a time!

Of course with those levels of lighting, radiant heating can be a serious issue - not so much for outdoor test rigs like the one pictured, but certainly for high speed filming of tests inside vacuum chambers and suchlike.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #17
rhody
Gold Member
630
3
Of course with those levels of lighting, radiant heating can be a serious issue - not so much for outdoor test rigs like the one pictured, but certainly for high speed filming of tests inside vacuum chambers and suchlike.
Aleph,

So are you saying the 1 million fps in the video here: is not actually at 1 million fps, but something less, or that the bullet collisions were made in vacuum chambers, and at the advertised speed of 1 million fps ?

Rhody...
 
  • #18
AlephZero
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
6,994
293
Aleph,

So are you saying the 1 million fps in the video here: is not actually at 1 million fps, but something less, or that the bullet collisions were made in vacuum chambers, and at the advertised speed of 1 million fps ?

No, of course I'm not questioning the speed of those videos. But if you look at the camera spec here http://www.engadget.com/2005/03/29/shimadzus-million-frame-per-second-video-camera it has a resolution of 312 x 260 pixels and captures a maximum of 100 frames.

That is no use for what we need, because for want to accurately measure things that are smaller than 1/1000th of the size of the image, and we need thousands of consecutive frames not 100. He is taking a closeup of a bullet. We are taking pictures of a 10-foot-diameter jet engine but we still want to be able to see what happens to bullet-sized things (or even smaller) in the video.

As with any design there will be a tradeoff between speed and the other capabilities of the camera. I expect if we paid somebody serious money they could design a digital camera to meet our requirements, but so far as I know there is nothing on the market already.

Apart from the photography, just the data collection would be a major problem. Assuming the 1MFPS camera is 8-bit monochrome (the youtube videos aren't in color) they are collecting about 8 MBytes of data in 0.1 milliseconds. It's feasible to store that in computer RAM, and then save it to disk at a slower rate. But we would need to collect at least 60 Gbytes (and ideally several times that amount) in 0.2 sec. That's a completely different scale of problem - we are talking about fillling up the complete hard disk on a typical PC with data in a fraction of a second.
 

Related Threads on Slow/Ultra Slow Motion and Thread

  • Last Post
2
Replies
43
Views
5K
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
16
Views
20K
  • Last Post
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
13
Views
9K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
46
Views
8K
Replies
28
Views
4K
  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
889
Top