Moar Doug Mills
(media.greatawakening.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (76)
sorted by:
Cameras have burst mode now. He used a Sony A1. It can shoot 30 pics a second.
Pretty lucky capture. He would have been taking images from 0.00375 of any second.
But the exposure numbers still don't add up. I am now beginning to think he did not capture the bullet, but the blood and tissue in its wake.
I don't know what your number is. Based on velocity?
I don't think this would be the case cuz A. Probably a lot slower. B. Less likely to be a straight line, more of spraying every where C. Would probably be caught in the subsequent photos.
https://x.com/gsanskar0/status/1812408764919947721?t=CGh0twSSocG3J6qjMZBp8w&s=19
For the first comment, my calculation has nothing to do with bullet velocity. If you are taking 30 frames/second and each frame is 1/8000th of a second, than for every second, you are taking only 0.00375 of a second's worth of image. The remaining 0.99625 second remains unseen.
For the second comment, any blood/tissue from the wound would trail in the wake. That is a supersonic bullet. Things will not spray anywhere if they are being carried in the wake. An earlier or later frame would be 0.0332 second off, and the movement of the "bullet" would have taken it 99.6 feet downrange (or 66.4 at a velocity of 2000 fps). So, no, I don't expect to see any similar material in any other frame.
If you multiply 0.00375 by 8000 you get 3. So I think you had an error somewhere.
But we are saying the same thing. You have just a tiny amount of time. My numbers have that even tinier....1/3 of your time. But burst mode lets you take many pictures in a row. So that increases your chances a bit
Yes, but You still see 99% of the image. You still see Trump. But this only affects fast moving objects.
I imagine the initial impact would create all sorts of collisions and trajectories. So it the direction of the bullet generally not in a straight line, right?