“Quick as lightning” is our common simile for anything occupying,
to ordinary sense, no time at all. Exact measurements show that the
electric spark does occupy a time, which is almost inconceivably small,
and of which we can only say here that the one one-hundredth of a
second we have just been considering is a long period by comparison
with the duration of the brightest portion of the light.
[Illustration: FIG. 92.--A FALLING MAN.]
On page 245 we have the photograph of a flash of lightning (which
proves to be several simultaneous flashes), taken last July from a
point on the Connecticut coast, and showing not only the vivid zigzag
streaks of the lightning itself, but something of the distant sea
view, and the masts of the coast survey schooner “Palinurus” in the
foreground, relieved against the sky. We are here concerned with this
interesting autograph of the lightning, only as an illustration of our
subject, and as proving the almost infinite sensitiveness of the recent
photographic processes; for there seems to be no limit to the briefness
of time in which, these can so act in some degree, whether the light be
bright or faint, and no known limit to the briefness of time required
for them to act _effectively_ if the light be bright enough.
What has just preceded will now help us to understand how it is that
photography also succeeds so well in the incomparably fainter objects
we are about to consider, and which have been produced not by short but
by long exposures. We have just seen how sensitive the modern plate
is, and we are next to notice a new and very important point in which
photographic action in general differs remarkably from that of the eye.
Seeing may be described, not wholly inaptly, as the recognition of a
series of brief successive photographs, taken by the optic lens on the
retina; but the important difference between seeing and photographing,
which we now ask attention to, is this: When the eye looks at a faint
object, such as the spectrum of a star, or at the still fainter nebula,
this, as we know, appears no brighter at the end of half an hour than
at the end of the first half-second. In other words, after a brief
fraction of a second, the visual effect does not sensibly accumulate.
But in the action of the photograph, on the contrary, the effect _does_
accumulate, and in the case of a weak light accumulates indefinitely.
It is owing to this precious property, that supposing (for illustration
merely) the lightning flash to have occupied the one-thousandth part
of a second in impressing itself on the plate, to get a nearly similar
effect from a continuous light one thousand times weaker, we have only
to expose the ¡date a thousand times as long, that is, for one second;
while from a light a million times weaker we should get the same
result by exposing it a million times as long, that is, for a thousand
seconds.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account