Amazing photo made at the range today.

[cracked butt]

Looks like a bullet to me!

At the outdoor range I shoot at, when the sun is in the right position and its a clear day, you can actually see rifle bullets flying downrange through your scope or a spotting scope once they get out past 150 yards. When the conditions are Ideal, I shoot my scoped .22 from the bench at a target at 200 yards- you see a sliver appear in the air and suddenly start to really dive for the ground at 150 yards- If you zero it for 200 yards you can actually see where the bullet is hitting the target even though the scope is only has 6x magnification.

 

[citizen]

I'd LIKE to tell you it's a bullet, and a cool shot nonetheless, but it ain't.

 

[WonderNine]

That is AWESOME!!!

Anybody here with some knowledge of film speed that could confirm for us that it is in fact a bullet? Was that a digital camera by any chance?

Looking at it a second time it kind of looks like a light or reflection though

 

[Double Naught Spy]

And if it really is the bullet, can you then explain how it is that the bullet has only managed to travel a few feet in the amount of time it has taken the gun to fully discharge the muzzle flash and then be in recoil and mid cycle?

Yes, you can see bullets traveling down range in the daylight if you are standing behind the shooter. The more you move off the shooting plane, the less likely you are to be able to see it. Those observations are usually in daylight conditions where the bullet is more than adequately illuminated. That is not the case in this image.

 

[BlackJack]

I've noticed with Winchester BEB's (brass enclosed base) in .45 and sometimes .40 you can actually see the back of the bullet as it goes down range if you stand right behind the shooter on an indoor range and watch closely. Were you using BEB's by any chance?

 

[gun-fucious]

it looks like a bullet base reflection about half way down range

 

[WonderNine]

Yes, you can see bullets traveling down range in the daylight if you are standing behind the shooter.

One time I swear I saw a 165gr. Remington Core Lokt .357 going downrange. One I had shot myself. I dunno, I must have looked right, but I swear I saw it fly downrange and hit the snow. The sunlight was pretty good. I tried again to watch and couldn't see it again Maybe it was a squibish load? Recoil felt normal though.

 

[tex_n_cal]

Yes, I think it is the bullet. A fortunate shot.

the dominant light source in the shot is the flash. the camera shutter speed is sorta irrelevant.

You don't mention the brand of camera, but your owner manual may tell you the flash duration. IIRC 1/10,000 of a second is a typical value for a flash duration. If we use 1000 feet per second as the bullet velocity, the bullet could be "frozen" within .1 feet, or 1.2 inches during the flash duration. Given the camera angle, the bullet should light up and be be only slightly blurred.

Oleg and other folks may have more experience with flash settings, but I am convinced it is a bullet. The folks who actually set out to freeze a bullet use electronic triggers to catch the shot.

 

[WonderNine]

I'm talking film speed. If the exposure isn't fast enough you'd never see a bullet, most likely nothing at all, not even a blur. However it sounds like he used a digital camera.

 

[ReadyontheRight]

Why is the supposed bullet so bright when the flash seems to have trouble reaching down range?

I think camera flashes only travel 10-12 feet. The flash would never make it downrange before it dispersed.

 

[Lightsped]

The camera is a brand new Fujifilm digital camera. It is not my camera, and I don't know the model number, but it isn't a basic model as it has alot of buttons and gadgets on it....

The ammo used today is Winchester Whitebox from Wal Mart.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

To see your own shot going down range in many cases, you have to be looking over the top of your gun. Otherwise, much or most of the travel distance will be blocked from view, blocked by the gun itself. You gotta figure that the sights are higher than the barrel, even by just a bit for most handguns. If the bullet were to strike the target as aimed and with the gun sighted in traditionally, then the bullet should impact just above the sight radius to being completely above, but just barely. In other words, to be seen, the bullet has to come up in elevation relative to the sights. So that part of the distance where the bullet has not broken the sight plane will be distance where the bullet won't be seen.

In some cases, sights well above the barrel will increase the chance of spotting the bullet as the higher position means more of the bullet's trajectory will be visible.

What makes bullets visible to the shooter or someone right behind the shooter, say looking over the shooter's shoulder, it that the bullet will appear almost stationary in that there is little change in the position of the bullet vertically or horizontally. The further one moves away from the shooter, the more apparent movement will be visible and the velocity being apparent. Further off to the side and the bullet won't be visible.

gun-fucious, how might it be determined that the object is the bullet with the reflection off the base? How could it be determined that it wasn't something else like a pixel glitch (assuming digital camera used or an actual photograph that was scanned into the computer?

One critical piece of information that migh help resolve the issue is to know what sort of ammo was being use. If the round is unjacketed lead, FMJ with an open lead base, the the dull grey of the lead is not going to be all that reflective and hence would not be all that visible. If the round was TMJ, then the base would have been of a more a reflective metal such as would be the case since the base would be covered by copper.

 

[geegee]

I was amazed the first time I was shooting and was actually able to see some bullets travel downrange, as they were shot by my partner. It was a .45, so probably doing <850fps, and as I recall they were put downrange by...Double Naught Spy! If I remember correctly, a couple even hit the target! geegee

 

[gun-fucious]

Maybe the new Fuji digital cameras have....




matrix metering!



http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/fuji/finepix_f601-review/index.html

 

[JohnKSa]

Not a bullet.

As mentioned before if it were a bullet you would see muzzle flash and the gun wouldn't have recoiled as far as it has in the pic.

Probably a spec of burning powder or a film artifact.

BTW, seeing bullets in flight is fairly common. We had a 50 yard handgun event at the club and in the bright sunlight it was quite easy to see the autopistol bullets if you were standing behind the shooter and watching the target with binocs. Several guys had binocs and most were able to see the bullets at least some of the time.

Bullets from the magnum revolver loads were going too fast to see.

 

[techmike]

You'd have to have about 1/4000 sec shutter speed or better to create a pic like that. Unfortunately most flashes do not synchronize with more than 1/250 shutter speed.

No disrespect HD, but I disagree with both of the above statements. Many flashes on current camers sync much faster. In this case I believe that 1/4000 wouldn't be necessary because the bullet is traveling along roughly the same pl;ane as the lens. If it was at 90deg the a mega high shutter speed would be needed. If I were trying to get that shot I would use bulb and "paint" with my flash.

I think it might be a reflection from the base of the bullet.

 

[techmike]

Matrix Metering!

Bwhahahahaha

gun-fucious

THAT's funny. You must be a camera geek too.

 

[Ala Dan]

What would be cool, is if the bullet bounced back and
the shooter caught it with his teeth!

Best Wishes,
Ala Dan, N.R.A. Life Member

 

[hksw]

IMO, I think it could very well be the bullet. Having seen .22s go down range indoors and out, I think there is a good possibility it is. You could always try to duplicate the phenomenon to confirm.

 

[Devonai]

It can't be the bullet. If it was, the light would be red-shifted!

 

[Mike Irwin]

Bullet?

Possible, but I'm doubtful.

Muzzle flash?

Don't necessarily have to have a muzzle flash. Some powders have muzzle flashes that are slow low that the flash itself could have washed it out.

 

[itgoesboom]

I will give my professional opinion as a photographer here.

As several people have mentioned, most cameras sync with flashes below 1/250th of a second, and most P&S cameras sync much lower than that, closer to 1/60 or 1/90th of a second.

However, as any photographer can tell you, shutter speed has almost nothing to do with flash photography, except to control the amount of ambient light.

The power of the flash and the apature of the lens are what control how much light gets to the film plane/sensor. Since most flashes fire much faster than the mechanical shutter of a camera, often about 1/1000th of a second or even much faster, they actually act as the shutter during a flashed exposure.

Think of it this way.

Situation A

Pitch black room, absolutly no light, EV-0, subject 10' from the flash, flash set to fire and provide a metered exposure of f 5.6 @ ISO 100. When the flash fires, it will illuminate the subject at an exposure of f 5.6 @ ISO 100. It doesn't matter what the shutter speed is, as long as it is slower than the Max Sync speed (which is the fastest that the actual shutter can operate while allowing the flash to illumate the entire film plane/sensor evenly). The photo will look the same whether you use 1/125th of a second, or 1/30th of a second, since the flash is firing at a much faster speed, and that is the only illumination.

Ofcourse that rarely happens. So here is situation B

A room with an ambient exposure of 1/60th of a second, f 4.0, @ ISO 100, subject ten feet from the flash. The flash exposure is f 5.6 @ ISO 100 (remember shutter speed only controls the ambient light when using flash). So lets set the camera using 1/60th of a second, with f 5.6 (our metered flash exposure), @ ISO 100. Our ambient light will be 1 stop darker (50% less light) than our flash exposure. Now for fun, let's set the camera to 1/125th of a second, and now our ambient light is 2 stops darker than our flash exposure. Our flash exposure will stay the same no matter what though.

That being said, i still doubt that a P&S camera would have a flash powerfull enough and quick enough to "freeze" the bullet. Is this a P&S camera? I have no idea, since the EXIF data is not there. Therefore, i cant tell any camera settings, including flash settings.

BUT, considering the angle, it wouldn't necessarly have to "freeze" the bullet, since the bullet is flying almost directly away from the camera. It would just have to illuminate the base enough to reflect enough light to show up on camera. It does appear that the might be a little blur, but its hard to tell.

Whether this is the case or not, i can't tell, since the photo looks to have been down rezed, and compressed fairly heavily. It would be intresting to look at the raw image and see what it shows.

So i would say that based on photographic evidence, it is inconclusive based on what we see here.

So why the long post?

Just a little photography lesson for you out there regarding flash exposure.

I.G.B.

 

[Matt G]

Having seen a LOT of bullets in flight, I'm willing to believe it.

First off, the angle is very slight. Thus the bullet is not moving very much in relation to the camera. Second, the flash is much cluser to the bullet than to any other bright shiny thing. If the walls and ceiling are painted black, as they usually are, the flash will have little else to reflect off of, and the bullet will have a high contrast background to be seen against.

The angle is almost the perfect one to see handgun bullets in flight. I find that I see them the most from the 5 or 7 o'clock position from the shooter, with a dark background beyond the path of the bullet, and especially if the sun is behind me at a high angle.

The flash would have likely obscurred a lot of the muzzle flash, just as the sun does when you shoot during broad daylight. Also, depending on the speed of the powder and load, some full-size pistols can pretty efficiently burn up a powder charge.

Agreed that the real "shutter speed" is the overlap time of the camera speed and the flash.

Fun stuff.

 

[Pendragon]

I dont know about the G30 or how long the barrel is, but .45 ACP is pretty much the lowest or one of the lowest flashing calibers there is.

I saw a comparison in a magazine some time ago and they found that some .45 loads had virtually no flash IIRC.

I vote bullet.

 

[50 Freak]

yep its the bullet.

the 45 is a pretty slow moving bullet. I've on numerous times seen 45 bullets traveling downrange. Actually the light reflecting off the lead base of the bullets makes it easy to follow the bullet to its target.