Long exposure-film vs digital

lavascript · 01-05-2011, 09:00 AM

I took this photo last night. Something struck me as odd about it though. Obviously, I passed a Taco Bell on my right during the exposure. But instead of one long streak, there are several places where the sign is pretty clearly visible. Is there a "pulse" or "refresh rate" to a digital sensor? I'm thinking if this same shot was done on film, that sign would be a continuous blur.

AHA! I'm going to go ahead and post this anyway, but while I was typing, I realized that the sign is lit by fluorescent lights, which pulse and are not continuous. Which makes perfect sense in the image.

Attached Images

enoeske · 01-05-2011, 10:22 AM

part of it might be the lights in the sign rather than the sensor. If the lights in the sign have a refresh rate, then they will be choppy instead of smooth. The other lights in the picture don't exhibit a "refresh rate"-like pulse so I wouldn't blame the sensor just yet.

lavascript · 01-05-2011, 11:29 AM

Originally posted by enoeske

part of it might be the lights in the sign rather than the sensor. If the lights in the sign have a refresh rate, then they will be choppy instead of smooth. The other lights in the picture don't exhibit a "refresh rate"-like pulse so I wouldn't blame the sensor just yet.

Right... Typing my question out made me realize that, so I included it with my post.

Wheatfield · 01-05-2011, 04:01 PM

Neon and florescent lights flicker at 60 cycles per second in North America.
In Europe, I suspect this differs since their power is 50hz.

01-05-2011, 09:00 AM	#1
lavascript Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Baton Rouge Posts: 394	Long exposure-film vs digital I took this photo last night. Something struck me as odd about it though. Obviously, I passed a Taco Bell on my right during the exposure. But instead of one long streak, there are several places where the sign is pretty clearly visible. Is there a "pulse" or "refresh rate" to a digital sensor? I'm thinking if this same shot was done on film, that sign would be a continuous blur. AHA! I'm going to go ahead and post this anyway, but while I was typing, I realized that the sign is lit by fluorescent lights, which pulse and are not continuous. Which makes perfect sense in the image. Attached Images

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Black & White Long exposure with the LX	nickthetasmaniac	Post Your Photos!	5	09-09-2010 09:45 AM
How long will fresh batteries last in long exposure?	tnis0612	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	6	05-18-2010 09:11 AM
Landscape First long exposure	timstone	Post Your Photos!	6	04-14-2010 07:21 PM
Camera exposure digital vs film.	SuperAkuma	Photographic Technique	16	04-20-2009 02:44 AM
Night photography with K10D - High ISO short exposure VS Low ISO long exposure	pw-pix	Pentax DSLR Discussion	10	02-03-2008 01:37 AM

01-05-2011, 10:22 AM	#2
enoeske Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Surprise, Az Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,136	part of it might be the lights in the sign rather than the sensor. If the lights in the sign have a refresh rate, then they will be choppy instead of smooth. The other lights in the picture don't exhibit a "refresh rate"-like pulse so I wouldn't blame the sensor just yet.

01-05-2011, 11:29 AM	#3
lavascript Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Baton Rouge Posts: 394 Original Poster	Originally posted by enoeske part of it might be the lights in the sign rather than the sensor. If the lights in the sign have a refresh rate, then they will be choppy instead of smooth. The other lights in the picture don't exhibit a "refresh rate"-like pulse so I wouldn't blame the sensor just yet. Right... Typing my question out made me realize that, so I included it with my post.

01-05-2011, 04:01 PM	#4
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,981	Neon and florescent lights flicker at 60 cycles per second in North America. In Europe, I suspect this differs since their power is 50hz.