[reh321]

Well, it's not about film or digital, Reh, it's about the shutter.

Your film cameras had mechanical shutters, and there wasn't the 1/15s or so sync speed as described above.

My point was that film didn’t have “read out” speed, so it should be roughly equivalent to the “global shutter” you’ve already described.

[clackers]

My point was that film didn’t have “read out” speed, so it should be roughly equivalent to the “global shutter” you’ve already described.

?

You're 'hard work', as the euphemism goes, Reh.

The issue is that two shutter curtains cross the film surface, right?

Not at the same time, right - there is an interval of the shutter speed between them?

And they begin at one edge of the film, and finish at the other, with a time interval between start and end of motion, right?

There is nothing global about a film camera's shutter. But the effect with a modern one is about 1/200s, not 1/15s.

Read Biz-engineer's comment above.

[beholder3]

How well does film work at “stopping motion”??

As clackers wrote, it is about the shutter mechanism not the sensor.

And actually it is not about „stopping motion“ either.
The set shutter speed will typically stop the motion in the sense of freezing it without motion blur.

It is just frozen in a distorted way. The top part in early state, the bottom part in a later state.

A Pentax 645 has 1/60 sync.
A Pentax 67 has 1/30 sync.
A Pentax LX has 1/75.
A Nikon F3 has 1/80.
A Canon AE1 has 1/60.


Leaf shutters are much faster, typically 1/500 to 1/1600 in some very modern cases.

From what I read 1/60 is pretty typical for film SLRs.

And at around 1/60 sync speed the distortion in normal average use cases starts to be a non issue.
Obviously if you shoot very fast moving subjects such as hummingbirdwings or propellers 1/60 is not enough.

[reh321]

OK - let's try an example.

I took the below picture in 1988.
I don't remember how fast the train was traveling, but assume it is about 25 MPH.
My eyes don't see any distortion - things I know to be vertical look vertical - and I don't see any "motion blur", even when looking at a 3000x2000 version of the scan at 200% or 400%.





I took the below photo a couple of years ago with my KP. I believe the train was going close to the railroad's limit of 79 mph.
I do know it was past before I realized it was one of AMTRAK's new locomotives by Sieman's - again my eyes see neither distortion nor blur.






This motion thing is not as simple as it sounds.

---

Last edited by reh321; 01-13-2022 at 06:32 AM.

[clackers]

This motion thing is not as simple as it sounds.

As Shakespeare said - "There are more things in heaven and earth, Reh, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy".

Did you know a K-30 with aperture block issues appears in the final act of Hamlet?

Below is a vintage picture from https://photo.stackexchange.com/questions/9223/why-do-dslrs-in-movie-mode-ha...global-shutter

[reh321]

?

You're 'hard work', as the euphemism goes, Reh.

The issue is that two shutter curtains cross the film surface, right?

Not at the same time, right - there is an interval of the shutter speed between them?

And they begin at one edge of the film, and finish at the other, with a time interval between start and end of motion, right?

There is nothing global about a film camera's shutter . But the effect with a modern one is about 1/200s, not 1/15s.

Read Biz-engineer's comment above.

My understanding is that an alternative to a ‘global shutter’ would be chip which paired a memory cell with each pixel; it would ‘latch’ the value in the pixel upon a signal, then all cells could be read at the camera’s ‘convenience’.

Is there anything {other than expense and possible heat} with the scheme?
Wouldn’t it produce the same photos that a film still camera would?

[clackers]

My understanding is that an alternative to a ‘global shutter’ would be chip which paired a memory cell with each pixel; it would ‘latch’ the value in the pixel upon a signal, then all cells could be read at the camera’s ‘convenience’.

Is there anything {other than expense and possible heat} with the scheme?
Wouldn’t it produce the same photos that a film still camera would?

It would be superior.

A film still camera and a digital still camera both have rolling shutters, just mechanical ones, which, as explained to the beginners above, are quicker than a non-global electronic shutter, so the effect is less noticeable.