PDA

View Full Version : One trillion frames per second


Jay DeFehr
13-Dec-2011, 07:57
Researchers at MIT create a new imaging system that captures one trillion frames per second, imaging the movement of photons.

http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2011/trillion-fps-camera-1213.html


That's slow motion!
Vaughn
13-Dec-2011, 17:18
But is it a new imaging system, or a new imagination system? Or does it matter? The images shown are a visualization, not the actual event itself -- as far as I can understand the process. A constructed image. Very interesting!
Jay DeFehr
13-Dec-2011, 18:25
Yes, it's a very clever system, and not at all intuitive. The 2D image is built up from many 1D images (if you can imagine a 1D image), so it is a kind of composite construction. And we should remember no image is the actual event it depicts, not even the ones formed on our retinas; they're all interpreted data. This system allows them to collect data previously inaccessible, from which to build an image. I read recently that the human eye can see only a fraction of a trillionth of the electromagnetic spectrum-- I didn't realize how tiny a sliver we see-- and we have similar limitations regarding the intervals of time we can perceive directly, but clever researchers are always looking for ways to extend our perception beyond our biological limitations. I'm very impressed, and very grateful.
hmf
13-Dec-2011, 20:42
Wow. If they get approximately the same 'hit rate' that I do - 1 negative in 10 worth an attempt at printing, they'll get 100 million interesting negatives in every second. And people say that Gary Winogrand left a lot of unprocessed film!!
Jay DeFehr
13-Dec-2011, 21:06
Wow. If they get approximately the same 'hit rate' that I do - 1 negative in 10 worth an attempt at printing, they'll get 100 million interesting negatives in every second. And people say that Gary Winogrand left a lot of unprocessed film!!

"Honey, would you pick up another package of film sleeves?":D
cyrus
13-Dec-2011, 21:10
yes yes, but if they used a view camera, they wouldn't NEED a trillion photos.
Corran
13-Dec-2011, 22:13
But then they would need a trillion millimeters of bellows extension to get that much magnification. :)
Alan Gales
13-Dec-2011, 22:15
yes yes, but if they used a view camera, they wouldn't NEED a trillion photos.

You're right, but if Canon or Nikon can produce a DSLR that can do the same, just imagine the amount of numb nuts that would buy it!