If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
Do Canon's competitors have something like CHDK? Time Lapse,etc?
On 9/8/2010 11:49 PM, DanP wrote:
On Sep 8, 11:32 pm, Superzooms Still wrote: On Wed, 8 Sep 2010 15:18:48 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Sep 8, 9:14 pm, wrote: At ISO200, full sunlight is EV17. f/4, 1/40000 would be slightly above EV19. Still four times more light than high sun. -- Bertrand 1/40,000 sec with CHDK is possible only at f/8 only. Useless, use strobes instead. DanP Useless to someone with severe thinking limitations only. Do you have a heavy degraded 1/40,000 sec photo with no EXIF data, half a megapixel in size, that you can post and delete before I can see it? I don't really understand your problem. You don't have a use for high shutter speeds, fine, but to argue for many, many posts that since you don't have a use for them they are useless to anybody is starting to look like arguing for the sake of argument. |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
Do Canon's competitors have something like CHDK? Time Lapse,etc?
On 9/9/2010 7:57 AM, DanP wrote:
On Sep 9, 10:57 am, "J. wrote: On 9/8/2010 11:32 PM, DanP wrote: On Sep 9, 12:08 am, "J. wrote: On 9/8/2010 6:18 PM, DanP wrote: On Sep 8, 9:14 pm, wrote: At ISO200, full sunlight is EV17. f/4, 1/40000 would be slightly above EV19. Still four times more light than high sun. -- Bertrand 1/40,000 sec with CHDK is possible only at f/8 only. Useless, use strobes instead. So how many strobes does it take to light up an artillery range? Don't know. How can you shoot that with a camera? Usually by pointing the camera at it and pressing the shutter release. Is gonna come out pitch black mate. So where are the lights in the videos I linked earlier? |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
Do Canon's competitors have something like CHDK? Time Lapse, etc?
On Wed, 8 Sep 2010 19:26:21 +0200, Wolfgang Weisselberg
wrote: Ofnuts wrote: On 08/09/2010 06:04, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote: wrote: and how do you light your subject? Powerful flashbulbs. Electronic flashes. How many CHDK-capable cameras have a flash sync connector? Not speaking of sync'ing the actual flash with such a short shutter... You don't. You do. You sync the camera to the flash. After all, a flash may well be 1/1.000s long --- long enough for a 1/40.000s exposure. -Wolfgang And some of the external flash units used with CHDK cameras have flash durations as short as 1/224,000th of a second, and they are still able to perfectly sync with the 1/40,000th second shutter speeds. http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CameraFeatures Get your pretend-photographer DSLR-TROLLs' heads out of your asses. (Is that ever possible for a troll to do that? I think not.) |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
Do Canon's competitors have something like CHDK? Time Lapse, etc?
On Wed, 8 Sep 2010 19:43:01 +0200, Wolfgang Weisselberg
wrote: Robert Sneddon wrote: Using a CHDK-equipped Canon at a very high shutter speed, a flash is not required and simple continuous high-intensity floodlighting of the scene will suffice. With ISO 80 and f/5.6, you need LV 21. In other words, you need about 32 times more light than the sun produces[1]. That's gonna be quite hot very soon. Doc's pictures referenced above required very short pulses of intense light from high-intensity strobes to create the short "exposures" in a blacked-out room, usually with the camera shutter locked open to avoid synchronisation problems. True, but guesstimate the exposure time. Bullet ~= speed of sound (300m/s), doesn't move a mm in the exposure. Exposure is faster than 1/300.000s, probably 10-100 times faster. Do you think 1/40.000s is impressive? From http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/Samples:_High-Speed_Shutter_%26_Flash-Sync When discussing the 1/60,000th second flash duration that's available on all Powershot cameras' built-in flash unit. "I have since been investigating other uses of high-speed flash on the internet, and ran across this little discussion http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1025&message=25862847&changemod e=1 , when someone was enquiring about photographing shot-gun spread-patterns from the side, and how fast of a flash would be needed. The reply is rather appropriate for this photo. They compared the edge speed of a Dremel-drill cut-off wheel with ballistics speeds. I guess this means that if you wanted to, and had a way to sync your camera to a rifle shot, you could get one of those spectacular images of a bullet ripping through a playing-card, edge-wise. Also worth noting in my net searches, most 'high speed' flash units on the market rarely go above 1/50,000th of a second, more commonly about 1/20,000th to 1/30,000th of a second, at exorbitant cost." If only you fool pretend-photographer DSLR-TROLLs would ever educate yourselves. We wouldn't have to spoon-feed knowledge to you ever day. |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
Do Canon's competitors have something like CHDK? Time Lapse,etc?
On 08/09/2010 19:26, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
wrote: On 08/09/2010 06:04, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote: wrote: and how do you light your subject? Powerful flashbulbs. Electronic flashes. How many CHDK-capable cameras have a flash sync connector? Not speaking of sync'ing the actual flash with such a short shutter... You don't. You sync the camera to the flash. After all, a flash may well be 1/1.000s long --- long enough for a 1/40.000s exposure. You mean, the camera senses the flash and triggers? -- Bertrand |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
Do Canon's competitors have something like CHDK? Time Lapse, etc?
in alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, about: Do Canon's competitors have something like CHDK? Time Lapse, etc?; On Wed, 08 Sep 2010 12:20:35 -0700, SMS wrote: On 9/8/2010 12:12 PM, Crash! wrote: SMS wrote: On 9/7/2010 1:00 PM, Irwell wrote: I'm really puzzled as to why our favorite troll is so upset that I contributed to the documentation and added some camera specific information. If he's so gung-ho about CHDK, you'd think he'd be thrilled that people are helping out! You mean the two sock puppets using X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 4.1/32.1088 ?? ...that constantly calls everybody trolls? Hey, don't complain about that. There's information in those headers that makes filtering him very easy despite his constant name changes. It's what happens when minor delusions of grandeur meet a highly bifurcated world view, and the insecurities caused by low esteem, both self, and his cause. It looks to be extreme jealousy of people that actually have knowledge of the subject, but perhaps it's also jealousy of those that can afford a D-SLR. AHA! I kinda suspected; "When John talks about Paul, he says more about John than Paul." Well, you certainly know him better than I do. It looked like general personality traits to me. So his behavior is issue-specific? I like trolls now and then, cuz they can be made to say about anything, they makes my point so much better than I could alone. We see the same thing with the other main troll on rec.photo.digital. Egads! Lucky me, I only noticed the two-sock- puppet guy using 4.1/32.1088, Zoomie & Troll Buster, some such. So there's a second troll - I'll beware. |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
Do Canon's competitors have something like CHDK? Time Lapse, etc?
in alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, about: Do Canon's competitors have something like CHDK? Time Lapse, etc?; On Wed, 08 Sep 2010 14:46:32 -0500, Superzooms Still Win wrote: On Wed, 08 Sep 2010 10:54:20 -0700, Crash! wrote: To freeze a hummingbird's wings in a closeup, were's talking around 1/10,000 or faster. So if it could be lit, and it could, CHDK could make a cool pic, but isn't strobe easier, faster,....and off the shelf? A photo of a hummingbird shot at 1/10,000th of a second in sunlight using available-light alone was already posted many times. The author of that photo gave me permission to repost it whenever I wanted. Did you miss all the times it was posted? Awww... too bad. Huh!???? Wow. BTW: I wrote 99% of all the documentation for CHDK. They merely used my documentation and then compiled it into the PDF that's available now. Well, the included only part of it. They left off all the pages I wrote for the µBASIC tutorial, how to design grids (nearly all of them on the Wiki done by myself), and left out quite a bit of information from the 3 original user guides (for various builds) that is still applicable to the latest version. You really need to dig into all the older documentation pages to get the full scope of what CHDK can do. (I don't have to, I already know all that I wrote about it.) As well as wrote many of the most popular scripts for it, many of them used as the foundation for better scripts that came after (like Fudgey's "Improved" Motion Detection script that I designed the foundation for). So, you see ... you ****ed off the wrong person if you wanted to know any real information about CHDK. But you go ahead, get advice from the SMS troll that knows absolutely nothing about how to use it. This should be quite entertaining to watch! LOL! Do you know what a lunatic you and your sock puppet sound like? Do you prefer being referred to in the singular, or the plural? Even if you were "The Grand Poo-ba of Mighty CHDK" that you claim, why would I use any info from somebody with such severe, untreated personality disorders? This should be quite entertaining to watch! "entertaining?" wow. I have no doubt you spend hours chortling at the Grand Battles and Victories you imagine here. I'm glad we can all help to provide you one place where you feel in control of your confusing, unknowable frightening world. You may find similar comfyness and security listening to the Rush Limaugh Show! As he desribes himself, he's just a harmless little fuzzball. His nice safe, easy to understand world is even more simple, and the fordimable enemy is out to desroy America! And they are everywhere! Limbaugh shreds them like rag dolls! And he'll teach you how to do the same. It's very, very comforting! |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
Do Canon's competitors have something like CHDK? Time Lapse, etc?
in alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, about: Do Canon's competitors have something like CHDK? Time Lapse, etc?; On Wed, 8 Sep 2010 17:15:35 +0100, Robert Sneddon wrote: In message , Ofnuts A well-lit office or shop runs to about 500-700 lux whereas regular daylight is 10,000 lux and bright direct sunlight is about 100,000 lux. A rough calculation suggests that a 1/40,000 second exposure would work for a sunlit scene for F/4 and ISO 200, possibly with a reflector to add side-illumination to the target to reduce shadowing. No frying required. I don't think so. People with $10 Brownie cameras shoot sunlit scenes at F/4 and ISO 200 all the time. They have no 1/40,000 second shutter. A common exposure in sun at ISO 200 is F/8 at 1,000th. ....or f/16 at 250. I shot a Nikon F 30 years w/o a meter. Batteries are for sissies! So assume f/8 for round numbers' sake. How bright must your light be at 1/40,000? |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
Do Canon's competitors have something like CHDK? Time Lapse, etc?
Do Canon's competitors have something like CHDK? Time Lapse, etc?; On Wed, 8 Sep 2010 10:30:09 -0700 (PDT), DanP wrote: On Sep 8, 5:15*pm, Robert Sneddon wrote: *A well-lit office or shop runs to about 500-700 lux whereas regular daylight is 10,000 lux and bright direct sunlight is about 100,000 lux. A rough calculation suggests that a 1/40,000 second exposure would work for a sunlit scene for F/4 and ISO 200, possibly with a reflector to add side-illumination to the target to reduce shadowing. No frying required. I don't think so. Not even close. For 1/40,000 sec exposure the aperture will be set at f/8 regardless of what the display says. Here's some common sunny day exposures, most all manual camera users know this rule: http://herron.50megs.com/sunny16.htm |
#60
|
|||
|
|||
Do Canon's competitors have something like CHDK? Time Lapse, etc?
Do Canon's competitors have something like CHDK? Time Lapse, etc?; On Wed, 08 Sep 2010 16:05:23 -0400, J. Clarke wrote: On 9/8/2010 12:15 PM, Robert Sneddon wrote: A well-lit office or shop runs to about 500-700 lux whereas regular daylight is 10,000 lux and bright direct sunlight is about 100,000 lux. A rough calculation suggests that a 1/40,000 second exposure would work for a sunlit scene for F/4 and ISO 200, possibly with a reflector to add side-illumination to the target to reduce shadowing. No frying required. Nope. This video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7FMki6dlKg looks to be in the 50-100,000 frames/sec range and seems to have been shot with natural light. Here's another http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Num9TR7wlrw&feature=related. Here's the proper exposu http://herron.50megs.com/sunny16.htm |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Time Lapse Video | Alan Smithee[_2_] | Digital SLR Cameras | 1 | February 5th 09 04:32 AM |
Time lapse pointing at sun ok or not? | DeanB | Digital Photography | 12 | June 22nd 07 05:55 AM |
DSLR time lapse | Paul Furman | Digital SLR Cameras | 21 | December 13th 06 05:09 AM |
time lapse | [email protected] | Digital Photography | 8 | February 27th 06 02:32 AM |
Time lapse photography | sam maradia via PhotoKB.com | Digital Photography | 1 | February 7th 05 12:55 PM |