Aliens On Earth.com Resources for those who are stranded here Our Bookstore is OPEN Over 5000 new & used titles, competitively priced! Topics: UFOs - Paranormal - Area 51 - Ghosts - Forteana - Conspiracy - History - Biography - Psychology - Religion - Crime - Health - Geography - Maps - Science - Money - Language - Recreation - Technology - Fiction - Other - New Search... for keyword(s)   in Page Titles in Book Title/Author in Contents of Pages ---other searches--- Metacrawler Yahoo FAST Search Google Altavista Dogpile Inference Find Northern Light IWon.com MSN Search Las Vegas Sun Location: Mothership -> UFO -> Updates -> 1998 -> Oct -> Re: UFO Video Technique

UFO UpDates Mailing List

From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 20:36:12 +0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 01:29:58 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Video Technique


>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
>Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 10:32:14 -0500
>Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 18:42:56 -0500
>Subject: Re: UFO Video Technique

>>From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
>>Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 20:48:37 +0000
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: UFO Video Technique

Earlier, I had written:

>>There seems to be a discussion regarding whether it's safe to
>>shoot into the sun with a video camera (I think). As long as you
>>keep your eye to the viewfinder, there is no danger at all. If
>>the camera is a CCD type, then the camera is safe, also (though
>>the results on a consumer camera might be questionable). If the
>>camera is an older "tube" type, then one should not point it at
>>the sun or any another bright, raw light source as the imaging
>>tube will get a permanent burned spot.

In response, Bruce asked:

>I agree with what you say here but I question one thing:  you
>say it is OK to shoot the sun with a CCD camera. This is
>true..... for a short time (seconds?). But I wonder..... solar
>thermal radiation collected by the lens is bound to heat the CCD
>at the focal spot. Therefore I would worry that _extended_
>filming of the sun could damage (melt?) the CCD.

Actually, the only real danger (if any) would be to the auto
iris and not the CCD it self. Since the auto iris is capable of
closing down completely, if necessary, to compensate for any
increase of light, it places itself in the path of any
concentrated "hot spots" that might occur.

Bob Shell might want to weigh in on this (since he has actually
designed lenses), but it is my understanding that the light
collecting on the iris isn't anywhere as concentrated as it
would be on the CCD where the image is really focused to a
pinpoint. However, despite this pinpoint focusing, the intensity
of the image isn't any greater than a pinpoint image from a
Christmas tree light. This is due to the iris, which opens or
closes to keep the exposure falling on the CCD element constant.

Regarding the amount of time; it shouldn't make a bit of
difference. CCD's are very rugged, compared to pick-up tubes of
older cameras (the whole reason CCD's were invented).

One note:

Older consumer tube cameras almost always had a manual iris
control. I was always amazed, since cranking them open could
ruin them in a second (and quite often did!). Ironically, the
newer home video cameras (with virtually indestructable CCD's)
usually lack this very useful feature, which is why most current
night shots of UFO's are washed out.

Too bad.

Later,
Roger Evans