• ValiantDust
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      4 months ago

      Also, storing a few high-res images takes a lot less space than storing hours/days/weeks/months of high-res videos.

      • StoneyDcrew@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        Not to mention that a lot of companies pay the minimum price needed for a camera for insurance purposes, as insurance is supposed to cover the damages.

        They only need to show that a crime was committed, not who committed it.

      • rtxn@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Also, observing a minuscule area of the sky for days or weeks will produce a much better image than the full field of view for 1/24th of a second in low light.

        • Hawke@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          Not that your point is incorrect, but most security cameras record at a much lower frame rate than 24 fps. 2 or 4 fps are common, and 0.5 exist as well.

          • SpacetimeMachine@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            4 months ago

            The shutter speed of the camera will not be 1/2 or 1/4 of a second however. It will still be taking images with a relatively short shutter speed/angle, otherwise everything would be very blurry.

          • Tar_Alcaran@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            Those are pretty antique though. You can get full-HD, 60fps security cams. They’re just annoying to store data for unless motion sensors are an option. To keep track of a store, that’s not a great solution.

    • Moghul@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      4 months ago

      Doesn’t JWST have to account for its own orbit around L2 and stellar parallax (depending on distance)? I assumed it would have to have some tracking.

        • Moghul@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          I have no idea, it just made sense in my head that when you’re cropping such a small portion of the picture, any movement would be visible and would probably fuck up data. In my mind the lens(es?) are in constant motion while in use. Itty bitty tiny little movement, but movement.