[moon2]

From the website:

If I ever find a good moving prop like a small fan, maybe I'll also re-shoot new previews to demonstrate how shutter speed affects moving objects.

Now, I'm just not sure how would one simulate a running fan with a picture. While for a static image you can have separated foreground and background and then apply effects for simulation (I know iPhone HEIC images have this property), for moving images you have to simulate the blur and the stillness, which is probably more difficult in terms of coding.

[andyfilms1]

I love the idea that this guy was easily able to scrounge up a florescent bulb in a beer coozie, but a desk fan is somehow unobtainable.

[nomel]

Why simulate? Most modern cameras can be controlled through USB. Just actually take each one (except for ISO, which you can easily fake), encode the frames in a reasonable bitrate MP4, then have a lookup for the frame in the video. :D

[moon2]

I don’t know if I follow. You mean to keep a fan moving, take pictures with all the different combinations (aperture and shutter speed). Then merge on an MP4 file that you can lookup somehow the setting combo with the frame?

Sounds… reasonable I guess! I guess it can be simpler than I imagined. The owner of the site just needs a fan :-)

[internetter]

This would require 18000 frames

[PetitPrince]

Ah ! Guilty as charged in not reading the whole page.

> Now, I'm just not sure how would one simulate a running fan with a picture.

I don't think it's necessary for this app. This is simulating what the camera sees, not what our eyes can see.