Yeah basically. It doesn’t try to record a single laser pulse interacting with the scene in one shot, but rather slightly adjusts its shutter offset to record another identical pulse in a slightly later position. Since the pulses are basically the same each time, the light will interact the same way with the stationary scene and you can reconstruct the movie from there. You can watch videos by searching 1 trillion FPS camera since that was how it was labeled by pop-science at the time.

Is this like that one that was able to film photons in slow by just filming a very short laser pulse at a slightly different time each frame? That was a cool concept, I’ll have to look more at this one

You have a favorite photo you’ve taken over the years?

That’s awesome. Not too many things we own today can appreciate in monetary value to reflect the personal value we got out of them. Though I suspect the personal value can never really be quantified for you.

You still play any of them? Have a favorite?

Hmm, that’s a new theory I haven’t heard. It sounds pretty plausible so I’ll be interested to see if it plays out like that.

Ahh, fair enough. Missed that bit

I feel like they’d have made more money by licensing their patent to Apple rather than trying to sell a watch for a ridiculous $999 price tag. I’m not saying they were wrong for their patent lawsuit, and it’s nice to see that small companies can still win, but I just don’t see this early product getting enough sales for them to profit.