I'll also take this opportunity to note that the formula does not
consider the extremely short durations of flash photos.
Chuck Norcutt
Nick Wilson wrote:
> usher99@xxxxxxx wrote:
>
> Hmmm,
> Physicists delving into biological systems. A very useful approach though
> the assumptions can be inaccurate.
> Blinking frequency is also a function of activity. One suspects this
> decreases when posing for a a group picture. He also used a system with a
> faster sych speed than my OM-2. I would rather trust Dr. Flash's judgment
> as to how many shots are required for a keeper.
> Mike
>
>
> Perhaps I missed the beginning of this thread, but there is research in.
>
> The 2006 Ig Nobel Prize for Mathematics went to Nic Svenson and Piers
> Barnes from the CSIRO for their research into the number of group photos
> needed to (almost) ensure that no-one has their eyes shut.
>
> http://velocity.ansto.gov.au/velocity/ans0011/article_06.asp
>
> Details of all prize winners at:
> http://www.improb.com/ig/ig-pastwinners.html. My favourite: the 2004 Ig
> Nobel Peace Prize for inventing karaoke to Daisuke Inoue.
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> Nick
>
> PS My nephew is into physics and not into biology. To correct this
> glaring deficiency, one of his little pressies for this Christmas is an
> extract from Richard Dawkin's 'Climbing Mt Improbable' on the eye. It
> reads like physics, but is really biology. Sneaky, eh? It all meets
> somewhere in the middle. In the case of animals, perhaps it meats
> somewhere in the middle.
>
>
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|