Anyone watching Richard Hammond's Invisible Worlds?

[gaz]

On BBC1 now
It's bloody amazing, showing everyday things in super slow motion.

 

[potsy]

Good stuff ain't it.Liked the bumble bee

 

[gaz]

That bit with the milk into the water is mind blowing!!!!

 

[brockers]

Brilliant program.

The cameras used are so fast. how many frames per sec do they run at?

I did the water droplet thing as a final year physics project. Had to design a timing circuit to capture images of the droplet as it hit and 'rebounded' from the surface, and I seem to remember that explaining how it happens gets a bit more complex than just the effects of surface tension !

 

[gaz]

The cameras used are so fast. how many frames per sec do they run at?

I think some where 100fps

 

[brockers]

answering my own Q here, but just looked on interweb and some commercially available cameras can run at up to 200,000 fps (but usually around 2,000) . However, they only cost around £80,000, so that's alright then.

 

[Shaun]

I bet the film cans are MASSSIIIVVVEEE for the 200,000 fps ones ...

 

[brockers]

Yer. Can you imagine trying to find your way round the negatives hanging out to dry in the darkroom? It'd be like walking endless doorways of SoHo p0rn shops circa 1980, with those multicoloured plastic strips to protect the innocent from seeing the wares within. Maybe.

 

[itchyrider]

Brilliant stuff

 

[Kirstie]

It was interesting but I got a bit bored after a while because all it was was a set of short vignettes which basically went:
- here is something quite interesting
- let's look at it with a high speed camera
- now it's more interesting
- the end, on to the next one.

I was more interested in hearing about the science behind the phenomena rather than looking at 'something that looks a bit more interesting through a high speed camera'

So it was OK I guess.

That said, I really liked the sprites. They looked a bit people-shaped which was freaky.

 

[mangaman]

It was interesting but I got a bit bored after a while because all it was was a set of short vignettes which basically went:
- here is something quite interesting
- let's look at it with a high speed camera
- now it's more interesting
- the end, on to the next one.

I was more interested in hearing about the science behind the phenomena rather than looking at 'something that looks a bit more interesting through a high speed camera'

So it was OK I guess.

I agree - some interesting things slowed down, which looked pretty.

it didn't help they chose Richard Hammond to present it rather than a scientist or a camera specialist.

 

[Arch]

it didn't help they chose Richard Hammond to present it rather than a scientist or a camera specialist.

That was rather a plus for me, although I do wish he'd cut his hair...

I remember a demo of an ultra high speed camera on Springwatch (they were filming diving gannets I think) and Simon King held up a balloon filled with water, and then popped it with a pin, and they filmed it in high speed. Amazing. The water just sort of hung there for ages while the balloon disintegrated.

The sprites were good. Angels, perhaps?

 

[mangaman]

That was rather a plus for me, although I do wish he'd cut his hair...

You shouldn't be so shallow Arch

Surely a science themed program would benefit from someone presenting who knows a minutinae about science? His haircut shouldn't really affect your attitude to the program? (only joking really, although I'm pissed off with "celebrity" presenters).

As an archaeologist you would appreciate the thread I was involved in a while ago (I didn't name the bloke, but it was Julian Richards). A respected archaeologist and a very good broadcaster - he told me he was asked by a broadcaster to recommend a 20-35 yr old archaeologist to present a program. No specific knowledge required - just to look non-threateningly pretty in a Riachard Hammondesque way and be able to walk around reading from an autocue looking a bit serious.

Needless to say Julian told them to go where the sun don't shine.

 

[02GF74]

I bet the film cans are MASSSIIIVVVEEE for the 200,000 fps ones ...

not reallyu, they probalby only do a few seconds or minutes at most.

 

[02GF74]

That was rather a plus for me, although I do wish he'd cut his hair...

I remember a demo of an ultra high speed camera on Springwatch (they were filming diving gannets I think) and Simon King held up a balloon filled with water, and then popped it with a pin, and they filmed it in high speed. Amazing. The water just sort of hung there for ages while the balloon disintegrated.

inertia surely?

there is a vid out there whare a large digger type thing has its digger ting filled with water above a car. then suddenly tips the water onto the car - you can see the water hang - then crush the car.