Roger Stone had Former CIA official Larry Johnson on his show yesterday. Johnson made a point that I hadn’t heard anyone make before. He said that it was odd that the photographer who took that shot, just happened to have a high-speed camera with him, able to capture the bullet. Were he and others tipped off that they should show up to that rally because something very newsworthy would happen there?
I’m not a photographer, so let me ask, is it unusual to have a high-speed camera at one of these rallies or is such equipment fairly common?
You can get a consumer-grade 1000 Frames Per Second digital camera for $148:
https://www.amazon.com/Casio-Exilim-EX-FH20-Digital-Optical/dp/B001G0N5H8/ref=sr_1_2?sr=8-2
At 1000 Frames Per Second, a projectile traveling 2,800 FPS would travel about 2.8 feet, which looks about right to me.
I am sure there are professional grade cameras that can do much better than that because professional photographers are willing to pay thousands of dollars for their equipment.
“Mr. Mills was using a Sony digital camera capable of capturing images at up to 30 frames per second. He took these photos with a shutter speed of 1/8,000th of a second — extremely fast by industry standards.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/14/us/politics/photo-path-trump-assassination.html
From what I saw, it’s not unusual.
In bright sunlight, a lot of cameras automatically default to a very fast shutter speed.
Common.
CNN has live cameras present at everyone of Trump’s rallies but never show the rally. Barely ever even show small clips from it all. Why were they happening to stream this particular one?
“these rallies or is such equipment fairly common?”
This has been discussed a few times here since the shooting. IIRC, almost everyone agreed that it is unusual.
A coincidence similar to CNN covering this particular rally when they hadn’t in the past.