Experimental Little Invention Takes Existence

elsie1969

zippydooda wrote: »

lets say then your exposure was 30 seconds. that means in the sharp picture you posted of iss. the line is 145 miles long

Wow..... is there some kind of mathmatical calculation, and wouldn;t it make a difference using a wide angle lens, or whether the ISS is overhead at the time or closer to the horizon, i'm sure these things must make a difference. Not that I know, YET! :rotfl: (Oh, something else to learn about!)

fairclaire

Random? But this just came on telly........raunchy and a fab tune

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0J5Q6JUv5A

davemorton

fairclaire wrote: »

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=x3jFcZjv_kk.....my 20p.......notice I haven't been conned into paying 50p yet

Instead of shutting your eyes, how about opening them?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fk1Q9y6VVy0

zippydooda

elsie1969 wrote: »

Wow..... is there some kind of mathmatical calculation, and wouldn;t it make a difference using a wide angle lens, or whether the ISS is overhead at the time or closer to the horizon, i'm sure these things must make a difference. Not that I know, YET! (Oh, something else to learn about!)

it travels at about 17,500 miles an hour. 30 seconds is 120th of an hr so 17,500/120 = 145 miles it travelled while you took picture.
unless you know different aau

davemorton

Well if it gets much quieter, I think a bit of agadoo may be called for!!!

elsie1969

davemorton wrote: »

lol, I just cant embrace it, I think a lot has been lost with 'progress' from wet photography. I think people will realise in 20 years or so, when they open draws, and dont find old photos. Nothing better than finding some old pics, and with digital, we are loosing that. its sad.

This is just what I was saying to an ex boyfriend I was chatting to the other day. We went to a Def Leopard concert in the early 90's and he posted a scanned pic on fb of it and was asking if I still had any. I said no doubt I have, but I got to pull out lots of boxes of pics to find out. I actually mentioned about how I love the tactile-ness of 'real' photographs and that is something I really miss.

zippydooda

davemorton

elsie1969 wrote: »

This is just what I was saying to an ex boyfriend I was chatting to the other day. We went to a Def Leopard concert in the early 90's and he posted a scanned pic on fb of it and was asking if I still had any. I said no doubt I have, but I got to pull out lots of boxes of pics to find out. I actually mentioned about how I love the tactile-ness of 'real' photographs and that is something I really miss.

this generation (of which I am almost part of ) is going to miss out on that, and it is so special! Tis a shame!

elsie1969

zippydooda wrote: »

it travels at about 17,500 miles an hour. 30 seconds is 120th of an hr so 17,500/120 = 145 miles it travelled while you took picture.
unless you know different aau

hmmmm, I think i'll leave this one to you and AAU zippy. What you have just said is going more over my head than the ISS has over the last few days. :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

........OK, I think I get it now.... I tell you how long the exposure time is, and you tell me how far it travelled in my photograph. Yeh, I like that idea better than me learning it. :D:D

zippydooda

davemorton wrote: »

this generation (of which I am a founder of ) is going to miss out on that, and it is so special! Tis a shame!

lights on timer now