1,000,000,000,000 Frames/Second Photography

[40hz]

This is awesome! You can now photograph the movement of photons in real time...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SoHeWgLvlXI

They've also open sourced the data and software to encourage further research.  

[superboyac]

I saw this last week.  Fucking incredible.  Sorry to curse, but it's the only way to describe it.
Stuff like this keeps me going in life.

[mwb1100]

This is awesome! You can now photograph the movement of photons in real time...

But, Is having everything available in "real time" where we really want to go?

In all seriousness, that is amazing.  I wonder how they're able to "open/close" the shutter so fast (I know they aren't using a physical shutter, but since I don't know what they are using, that's the term I'm stuck with)?

[40hz]

This is awesome! You can now photograph the movement of photons in real time...

But, Is having everything available in "real time" where we really want to go?

Would you believe I was waiting for that?  

Unfortunately, there will be no prize for your being the first.

Besides, isn't 'photographing' and 'having' two completely different things?  

[nosh]

I wonder how they're able to "open/close" the shutter so fast

It isn't a single shutter.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EtsXgODHMWk

[NigelH]

On TED
ramesh raskar - camera tha takes one trillion frames per second

[Deozaan]

Fantastic! Thanks!

[Renegade]

Kinda makes my Nikon look a bit low-tech.

[cranioscopical]

Kinda makes my Nikon look a bit low-tech.

Don't despair, think of it a symbol of quality snaps — nikonography.

[KynloStephen66515]

Holy shit thats awesome 

[Edvard]

Yeah, when I saw that, I was like "WAITAMINNIT!!!..."
- How did they get the shutter to open and close fast enough??  You would have to do it faster than the speed of the photon packet, which is physically impossible. WTH??
- How did they get a picture of a photon packet traveling through a transparent object when you need those very same photons striking the image sensor to take the picture??  By the time any photons scattered off the semi-transparent plastic and particulate in the water, the packet would be already gone.

Then I heard the guy talk in the TED video about how it's actually a composite of a bunch of timed shots put together sequentially, and I understood how they did the actual video.  So, it's not "real time" per se.
The answer to the second question is actually twofold and partially self-answering, and how I understand it is, (1) the 'packet' you see is in reality further along than where you see it at that particular frame because it still takes light more time to reach the image sensor than to travel down the length of the bottle, and (2) it's not an image of the actual packet, but the light from the packet that escaped as it went, refracting off the particulate in the water.
This, BTW is how we are able to see anything at all; we don't see the thing itself, just the light reflecting off of it.
Without the particulate and the semi-transparency of the bottle itself, you wouldn't see anything. Notice how at the beginning of the video, there is no light beam coming in before it strikes the back end of the bottle, where photons start scattering.

Cool stuff, anyhow  

[superboyac]

Yeah, when I saw that, I was like "WAITAMINNIT!!!..."
- How did they get the shutter to open and close fast enough??  You would have to do it faster than the speed of the photon packet, which is physically impossible. WTH??
- How did they get a picture of a photon packet traveling through a transparent object when you need those very same photons striking the image sensor to take the picture??  By the time any photons scattered off the semi-transparent plastic and particulate in the water, the packet would be already gone.

Then I heard the guy talk in the TED video about how it's actually a composite of a bunch of timed shots put together sequentially, and I understood how they did the actual video.  So, it's not "real time" per se.
The answer to the second question is actually twofold and partially self-answering, and how I understand it is, (1) the 'packet' you see is in reality further along than where you see it at that particular frame because it still takes light more time to reach the image sensor than to travel down the length of the bottle, and (2) it's not an image of the actual packet, but the light from the packet that escaped as it went, refracting off the particulate in the water.
This, BTW is how we are able to see anything at all; we don't see the thing itself, just the light reflecting off of it.
Without the particulate and the semi-transparency of the bottle itself, you wouldn't see anything. Notice how at the beginning of the video, there is no light beam coming in before it strikes the back end of the bottle, where photons start scattering.

Cool stuff, anyhow 

very nice explanation.  I'm still trying to wrap my mind around how photons are able to carry the information they do.  I know there's probability involved, and I've tried understanding the math behind it...but all the probability functions can't really explain how photons carry their particular information.  But that quickly leads to the never ending mass/gravity problems.

[Arizona Hot]

They also did this: A camera that can see around corners. The video for that is here and here.

[attachthumb=#]    [attachthumb=#]

[KynloStephen66515]

Such a shame, I felt the need to make a gif for it.

[Arizona Hot]

Such a shame, I felt the need to make a gif for it.

What gif?

[barney]

What gif?

Gifs are not always animations.  It's a graphics format that happens to work for stills, as well  .

[Deozaan]

Such a shame, I felt the need to make a gif for it.

What gif?

Oh you mean this gif?:

[attachimg=#]

[KynloStephen66515]

ffs lol ill fix

for now though see attachment