What is Digg?76 Comments
- Hortnon, on 10/10/2007, -2/+194So, where's the video?
- edesignweb, on 10/10/2007, -3/+75yeah don't waste my time with words.
- MrBabyMan, on 10/10/2007, -3/+55http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Mb_jOvgdCs
- blahtastic, on 10/10/2007, -1/+33Actually the idea sounds waay cooler before you see the video. Yawn...
- reiner15, on 10/10/2007, -3/+32I was just staring at the screen saying: Gooooooooooooooooooooooooo fasterrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
- MrBabyMan, on 10/10/2007, -2/+24Here's NYT's writeup on Michalek's work:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/14/arts/dance/14slow.html?ex=1343275200&en=c798f0bf2c25ec29&ei=5124&partner=permalink&exprod=permalink
and their video:
http://video.on.nytimes.com/index.jsp?fr_story=b68ebe67a58492dbdf595f8759c7e3910cff988a - borninda818, on 10/10/2007, -3/+24MrBabyMan TO THE RESCUE!!!!
- djlights, on 10/10/2007, -5/+23Check out the artist's website media tab http://www.slowdancingfilms.com/media.html
- mrASSMAN, on 10/10/2007, -2/+20Great.. hi-def video converted to youtube quality.
- EnsErmac, on 10/10/2007, -0/+14https://www.nike.com/nikegolf/swingportrait/index.html
Tiger Woods golf swing at 4000fps, a bit more interesting than the story, and much shorter. - inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+13Thanks buddy!
- dep01, on 10/10/2007, -0/+13The words were actually a bit more interesting than the actual video.
- diggface5000, on 10/10/2007, -4/+17off the charts lameness factor.... buried for making me waste mouse clicks
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -3/+15buried your name for being inaccurate
- badtzmartin, on 10/10/2007, -0/+12The word is FEAT, not FEET.
- abstracthuman, on 10/10/2007, -2/+13That was way better to read about than actually see it. God forbid I actually have some kind of inkling of what it looks like.
- DenTPuzz, on 10/10/2007, -0/+10I got bored, so i watched it in fast-forward... :-^
- pintomp3, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8even better, a shaky handycam capture of a hi-def video converted to youtube quality.
- gordeaoux, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8Shocking how a YouTube clip of a handheld palmcorder from waaay back in the audience doesn't live up to 3,000 fps HD.
- dchoi22, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7that was terribly boring
- AnteChronos, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8No clue why iHobo is being dugg down. The link *does* suck. An article about a video that has no actual video is pretty lame. Might as well have an article titled "Awesome Picture", with the entire article being a text description of the picture. I realize that this is corrected in the comments with a link to the video, but frankly, providing those types of links (if the article doesn't provide them) is the submitter's job. Way to drop the ball, zaibatsu.
Also, iHobo is also correct in that the video was shot at 1000fps, with the intermediate frames interpolated by means of software. To claim that the video is 3000fps is akin to claiming that blowing up a Youtube video to fill my entire screen makes the video 1680x1050, when all of the "extra" data is interpolated instead of recorded (i.e. dishonest at best). - wattznext, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8!0 minutes for a 5 second clip to unfurl? That's insane. this i gotta see.
- blahtastic, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7Whopdee freakin do.
- schoate09, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Buried as lame.
- optikalblitz, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Nothin worse than an article about a hi-def photo experience without any images.. MrBabyMan for prez!
- resplence, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7Yeah, to me they could speed it up a bit. Perhaps to the actual speed.
- mrASSMAN, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Yeah, amazing how this guy spends all this money on incredible camera technology only for his work to be ruined by a guy taping it with a cheap camcorder and further compressing it via youtube.. and then to have diggers go "UNIMPRESSED. I AM NOT ENTERTAINED. BURN HIM."
- blahtastic, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Nah, it's just that some muscle twitching in slow mo isn't really all that entertaining. I'm sure its very beautifully recorded...But it could just as easily be paint drying. Maybe at 3/4ths that slow it would a little more interesting. Or maybe I just have an incredibly poor attention span.
- RMoore08, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5I think watching paint dry on the wall is more entertaining...
- darlyn, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7How the ***** did this make front page??
- optikalblitz, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Pretty sure he should have left it at 1,000fps.. i'd rather watch grass grow than almost indiscernible movement at 3k fps.. bleh
- gordeaoux, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3this should have been the original submission
- wepeel, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Ballet? Screw that, I wanna see the truffle shuffle on this...now that's a dance...
- SuckMyDigg, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4I think the word you were going for was "feat".
- godisdead, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3What is it with sites that TALK about something you watch but don't provide links?
- nirav72, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3dude...felt like I was stoned or something....everything was slow...
- shagie, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2oh wow, that is really awesome. thanks ermac :D
- Hyru, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Show me a 3000 fps clip of Michael Jackson doing a complete 1080 in half a second then I'll be impressed.
- ben1sm4, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2You tell me. I was a dancer for years. You are not allowed to wear underclothing under a costume, and 9 times out of 10, someone has to hold you up in the air by your ass.......
- canewediggit, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3would be considerably better w/ some higher activity dancing and some more exposed skin to see the muscle movements. i just watched 'rize' this weekend and the slo-mo shots were much cooler than this.
- skyshock1, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Direct link to the YouTube video posted on that site - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Mb_jOvgdCs
- iStunT, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Yeah so that was actually REALLY lame and boring.. sounded better before i saw the video.
- oracleofmist, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2how much more skin of that sample video do you want. I honestly think that any less clothing would be painful to watch
- mal1964, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1They are fanatic athletes!
- kylerk, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Norman Maclaren did this first. Though his were only quarter speed and set to music
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5434905168094928663
This one is incredible. - inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Yes... dancers do have amazing feet.
wait, what? - dslemons, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I want to know what in the hell they lit that with! They must of had at least 20k watts of light to get any kind of image at that frame rate. Insane.
- KiTchMe, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Good way to release a 50-hr, 20-dvd video.
- HonoredMule, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Paint drying would parallel this only if you could just barely notice the paint actually changing color gradually as it dries.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Buried for no actual video.
-
Show 51 - 73 of 73 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is