Quote:
Originally Posted by RPS69
It's the only thing that's funny about those demos.
My two cents for the people that base this representation on guncams of WWII.
A frame rate of about 50fps, will probably be absolutely exagerated for a WWII guncam, but I will use that speed just for the sake of the worst case scenario.
20mm ammo, at least the types used on the sim, have an initial speed of 800m/s
(round numbers makes maths easyer)
So, at 50fps, we have 1/50s of exposure per frame, that meaning 0.02s
Then the length imprinted on the film by the tracer will be 800m/s x 0.02s=16m
So we could never see what the eyes of the pilot see, using a guncam as reference. The eyes also have some retention, but they recover faster than that.
The brighter the object, the worst the recovery. IL2 original tracers were far better than this ones, being a strong point, followed by a fainted line.
Sorry for bothering with this again, but I really don't like it. It feels too much of Star Wars to me.
|
I hear you...But this subject has been debated a lot...And strangely enough,
people who have been firing real guns of similar caliber have come forward to describe what they have seen with their own eyes...Ans it is damn close to COD...Star Wars laser shots concept was inspired by WW2 guncams !!!My personnal comment about tracers in COD is that they look to "fat", not enough string-like...But that is me...
Remember Oleg is a pro photographer...He knows all about shutter speed and eye's retention...Make a search on this forum, and you will find Oleg's comment and explanation about tracers,,,
Salute !