[QUOTE=Antimuffin;50728093]How much space do 340.000 FPS take up?[/QUOTE]
I'm not sure the actual size but they said 5.1 seconds produced 19 hours of footage.
Are you okay man? I'm worried for you.
[QUOTE=StrawberryClock;50728105]I'm not sure the actual size but they said 5.1 seconds produced 19 hours of footage.[/QUOTE]
:wow:
[QUOTE=StrawberryClock;50728105]I'm not sure the actual size but they said 5.1 seconds produced 19 hours of footage.[/QUOTE]
probably only a few GB considering the low resolution
[QUOTE=BackSapper;50728124]Are you okay man? I'm worried for you.[/QUOTE]
there's a conspiracy by google to stop me from posting videos on facepunch
[video=youtube;_46qVKwJ9PA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_46qVKwJ9PA[/video]
[video=youtube;Qa4Ie44RiJ0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qa4Ie44RiJ0[/video]
[QUOTE=Antimuffin;50728093]How much space do 340.000 FPS take up?[/QUOTE]
[url]https://twitter.com/GavinFree/status/753371245127675905[/url]
dunno what framerate they got here
[QUOTE=Antimuffin;50728093]How much space do 340.000 FPS take up?[/QUOTE]
Not as much as one would expect, I'd wager. The resolution drops proportionally to the framerate.
[QUOTE=Antimuffin;50728093]How much space do 340.000 FPS take up?[/QUOTE]
IIRC the buffer on those cameras are at something like 96GB, so it likely fills that up during those 5 seconds of recording .
[QUOTE=donhonk;50728248][url]https://twitter.com/GavinFree/status/753371245127675905[/url]
dunno what framerate they got here[/QUOTE]
He says later in the reply thread thing that it would take 19 hours, so that's the 343K FPS one.
Makes me wonder if it'll do double the fps with half the resolution.
680,000 fps you'd make a killer video for things like gas igniting or bullets crashing
congrat on not being crazy
[QUOTE=Tools;50728451]Makes me wonder if it'll do double the fps with half the resolution.
680,000 fps you'd make a killer video for things like gas igniting or bullets crashing[/QUOTE]
I read somewhere that the camera does million fps with the smallest res
[QUOTE=Tools;50728451]Makes me wonder if it'll do double the fps with half the resolution.
680,000 fps you'd make a killer video for things like gas igniting or bullets crashing[/QUOTE]
Well there's this video from 2009 which is filmed at 1 million FPS:
[media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfDoQwIAaXg[/media]
At 1 million FPS, bullets appear to act like water as they splash onto the targets.
1 second of 1 MFPS= ~11 hours of playback at 25 FPS.
Enjoy!
[editline]o[/editline]
Or to go even further, this is the fastest high speed video footage I've ever come across:
[media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZaB5B3pec-A&[/media]
One segment in this is filmed at a staggering 10 million FPS.
1 second of 10 MFPS = ~4.5 days of playback at 25 FPS.
Pyrex these days is almost exclusively tempered glass. Well their non labware stuff is. I'd like to see them do this with borosilicate as a comparison. Borosilicate glass isn't under internal tension the way tempered glass is. So when it breaks small pieces just fall off. It's supremely boring by comparison, but it's interesting to see the actual safety benefits first hand. Borosilicate is substantially more resistant to thermal stress, but is slightly easier to break it with physical impacts. The old Pyrex stuff is primarily borosilicate vs the modern tempered soda-lime.
For anything not being thrown into an oven, such as mixing bowls, measuring cups, or drinkware, tempered is definitely better. It will (should) never be subject to the temperature extremes needed to break it, and it's far more durable when you do inevitably drop it.
With that said, having a tempered glass baking pan explode in my hands, I can say that I will gladly pay the extra not to have to deal with that shit ever again. Pans from the 60s might have some chips in them, and the new ones are more expensive, but if you buy one, you'll never need to replace it unless [i]you[/i] break it by dropping or slamming it. Even if you do drop the thing, there is a very good chance that you will just take a chunk out of one of the handles. If that happens, you can just grind it smooth instead of replacing it.
While it is rare for tempered to explode, I really have no desire to pull glass splinters out of my ankles ever again. It might never happen to me again. It could also be my face. I have no incentive to find out.
[QUOTE=Zephyrs;50728994]Pyrex these days is almost exclusively tempered glass. Well their non labware stuff is. I'd like to see them do this with borosilicate as a comparison. Borosilicate glass isn't under internal tension the way tempered glass is. So when it breaks small pieces just fall off. It's supremely boring by comparison, but it's interesting to see the actual safety benefits first hand. Borosilicate is substantially more resistant to thermal stress, but is slightly easier to break it with physical impacts. The old Pyrex stuff is primarily borosilicate vs the modern tempered soda-lime.
For anything not being thrown into an oven, such as mixing bowls, measuring cups, or drinkware, tempered is definitely better. It will (should) never be subject to the temperature extremes needed to break it, and it's far more durable when you do inevitably drop it.
With that said, having a tempered glass baking pan explode in my hands, I can say that I will gladly pay the extra not to have to deal with that shit ever again. Pans from the 60s might have some chips in them, and the new ones are more expensive, but if you buy one, you'll never need to replace it unless [i]you[/i] break it by dropping or slamming it. Even if you do drop the thing, there is a very good chance that you will just take a chunk out of one of the handles. If that happens, you can just grind it smooth instead of replacing it.
While it is rare for tempered to explode, I really have no desire to pull glass splinters out of my ankles ever again. It might never happen to me again. It could also be my face. I have no incentive to find out.[/QUOTE]
I once had popcorn in a tempered glass bowl made for ovens and such, and it just fucking exploded in my lap v:v:v
Yeah. Tempered glass can be 'baking safe', but it's still possible for it to break in that way because of repetitive stress microfractures.
You are probably more likely to break borosolicate, just because people do tend to drop shit. The difference is that when it breaks it won't throw razor sharp fragments all over the place, and it will pretty much never ever under any circumstance break while you are holding it. It breaks when you drop it, and that's pretty much it. Tempered can explode while you are holding it.
[editline]17th July 2016[/editline]
Oh. Forgot to mention. If you are doing something with retarded amounts of heat, well above and beyond what you will ever see in a kitchen, the best stuff is fused quartzware. This is getting into top end labware. The thermal expansion of that stuff is minimal at best. It's functionally immune to thermal changes outside of brutal laboratory conditions.
It's completely impractical and overpriced for anything kitchen related. It's like 150 USD for a 500mL beaker. If you need it, there is no substitute, but you have to really need it before it becomes practical.
how does the camera even get that much light on the sensor for how fast the shutter speed is
[QUOTE=Glitchman;50729360]how does the camera even get that much light on the sensor for how fast the shutter speed is[/QUOTE]
Must be a huge ass sensor then.
[QUOTE=Antimuffin;50728093]How much space do 340.000 FPS take up?[/QUOTE]
kinda late but they replied to that question in the comments
[t]http://techbot.xyz/ShareX/screenshots/2016/07/18/04-09_1769.png[/t]
[QUOTE=Techbot;50729596]kinda late but they replied to that question in the comments
[t]http://techbot.xyz/ShareX/screenshots/2016/07/18/04-09_1769.png[/t][/QUOTE]
still better than fraps
[QUOTE=Glitchman;50729360]how does the camera even get that much light on the sensor for how fast the shutter speed is[/QUOTE]
They can't film indoors (not without some serious lighting gear) because slowmo takes so much light.
[QUOTE=paul simon;50728837]Well there's this video from 2009 which is filmed at 1 million FPS:
At 1 million FPS, bullets appear to act like water as they splash onto the targets.
1 second of 1 MFPS= ~11 hours of playback at 25 FPS.
Enjoy!
[editline]o[/editline]
Or to go even further, this is the fastest high speed video footage I've ever come across:
One segment in this is filmed at a staggering 10 million FPS.
1 second of 10 MFPS = ~4.5 days of playback at 25 FPS.[/QUOTE]
Maybe you could call this cheating, but there are recordings with higher FPS: [URL]http://www.theverge.com/2015/1/27/7920771/laser-captured-on-video-moving-through-air-for-first-time[/URL]
And:
[video=youtube;EtsXgODHMWk]https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=EtsXgODHMWk[/video]
[QUOTE=Plaster;50729437]Must be a huge ass sensor then.[/QUOTE]
It's a full-frame sensor.
35.8 mm x 22.4 mm
[editline]18th July 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;50731051]Maybe you could call this cheating, but there's been recording with higher FPS: [url]http://www.theverge.com/2015/1/27/7920771/laser-captured-on-video-moving-through-air-for-first-time[/url]
And:
[video=youtube;EtsXgODHMWk]https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=EtsXgODHMWk[/video][/QUOTE]
Figured someone would reply with that.
Yeah, that's absolutely what I'd considered cheating :v:
You couldn't record, say, a bullet traveling through the air with that technique, you can only record laser pulses.
It's more of an approximation technique than true high speed recording, because laser pulses can be repeated very accurately as many times as you want until you have the result you need.
[QUOTE=paul simon;50731054]Figured someone would reply with that.
Yeah, that's absolutely what I'd considered cheating :v:
You couldn't record, say, a bullet traveling through the air with that technique, you can only record laser pulses.
It's more of an approximation technique than true high speed recording.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, you can't record it in one go (takes like 400 different recordings), you can only use static objects and you need to process the images so that the propagation isn't shown in reverse.
gavin seems like a different person here compared to RT
like, is this normal or is this just me
[QUOTE=343N;50731731]gavin seems like a different person here compared to RT
like, is this normal or is this just me[/QUOTE]
RT Gavin is normal Gavin. Slo-Mo Gavin is him trying to act professional.
[QUOTE=Tuskin;50732927]RT Gavin is normal Gavin. Slo-Mo Gavin is him trying to act professional.[/QUOTE]
Gavin does other things? What is RT even?
He doesn't really come across as very "professional" to me, just normal.
[QUOTE=paul simon;50733450]Gavin does other things? What is RT even?
He doesn't really come across as very "professional" to me, just normal.[/QUOTE]
RoosterTeeth
[url]https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1512457[/url]
[url]http://roosterteeth.com/[/url]
Hes one of the Achievement Hunter guys. Before SloMo guys was popular that is where most people knew him from.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
