Camera shake and lp/mm

"Hemi4268" wrote in message
...
Even so this formula assumes equal handshake for
each exposure.

This is why you have a number generator in the formula. Say you have
shake
from 0 to 50 milliradian in a 1/100 of a second exposure. All you need to
do
is apply a number generator to the math and bin the possible outcomes.
Since
computers are so fast, you could actually image or sample 1000 images in
less
then a second or so. Now count the images free of motion vs those other
1000
images and you get our possible outcomes and chance of motion freeness.

Been there and done that spending big bucks of government money coming up
with
an image quality equation



But what would be the point in all of that? How would the ability to
quantify the effect of camera shake be of any practical use?

"Jeremy" wrote in message
hlink.net...

But what would be the point in all of that? How would the ability to
quantify the effect of camera shake be of any practical use?

Reconnaissance work. I suspect Hemi is a retired spook. Not a bad thing. He
was on our (USA) side.

It's also useful to know in order to build stabilazation devices,
motion-picture camera transports, all kinds of things!

The sharpest lens a photographer will ever buy is a tripod.

Jeremy wrote:

I recall reading Erwin Puts' take on this on his Leica website. He
attributed camera shake as THE single factor most likely to contribute to
blurring of the image...

I was really impressed by that statement--to the point that I began using a
tripod for virtually all of my shots--even those taken with my 2.3 MP
digicam. The improvement was astounding. I did not realize how much of an
effect a good tripod had on the image quality...

The sharpest lens a photographer will ever buy is a tripod.

Jeremy wrote:

I recall reading Erwin Puts' take on this on his Leica website. He
attributed camera shake as THE single factor most likely to contribute to
blurring of the image...

I was really impressed by that statement--to the point that I began using a
tripod for virtually all of my shots--even those taken with my 2.3 MP
digicam. The improvement was astounding. I did not realize how much of an
effect a good tripod had on the image quality...

"Christopher Perez" wrote in message
. ..

The sharpest lens a photographer will ever buy is a tripod.

Aren't you the guy with that wierd 76mm WA for 4x5?

"Christopher Perez" wrote in message
. ..

The sharpest lens a photographer will ever buy is a tripod.

Aren't you the guy with that wierd 76mm WA for 4x5?

But what would be the point in all of that? How would the ability to
quantify the effect of camera shake be of any practical use?

An image quality equation just gives you an idea of chances of success. You
might be able to answer the question can you "ID" someone at a 1 mile range.
What combos might be best. Would a small camera with a normal lens and super
high reso slower film be better then a large camera with a long lens and fast
film.

Note, a 50mm lens operating at 300 l/mm has exactly the same image info as a
300mm lens operating at 50 l/mm.

Larry

But what would be the point in all of that? How would the ability to
quantify the effect of camera shake be of any practical use?

An image quality equation just gives you an idea of chances of success. You
might be able to answer the question can you "ID" someone at a 1 mile range.
What combos might be best. Would a small camera with a normal lens and super
high reso slower film be better then a large camera with a long lens and fast
film.

Note, a 50mm lens operating at 300 l/mm has exactly the same image info as a
300mm lens operating at 50 l/mm.

Larry

Jeremy wrote:

"Warren" wrote in message
om...

A see a slight problem here in coming up with a formula.

Perhaps the OP was trying to devise a formula to tell him when a tripod
would be absolutely necessary. You're correct--how can one determine the
degree of camera shake? It would vary from person to person, and also would
vary even with the same person based on things like ambient temperature, how
tired the photographer was at the moment of exposure, etc.

You also have to know what kind of camera is used. Compare the whisper
of a Rolleiflex TLR to a steamhammer like RB67.

-- Lassi

Jeremy wrote:

"Warren" wrote in message
om...

A see a slight problem here in coming up with a formula.

Perhaps the OP was trying to devise a formula to tell him when a tripod
would be absolutely necessary. You're correct--how can one determine the
degree of camera shake? It would vary from person to person, and also would
vary even with the same person based on things like ambient temperature, how
tired the photographer was at the moment of exposure, etc.

You also have to know what kind of camera is used. Compare the whisper
of a Rolleiflex TLR to a steamhammer like RB67.

-- Lassi