Contact lens? Going to need a pile of lenses unless this new material is lasing.
Want to see at night? Here comes the infrared CONTACT LENS
University of Michigan boffins have created a tiny light detector that reaches into the infared, and is already small enough to be delivered as a contact lens. The key trick, the researchers say, is that they've created an infrared detector that doesn't need the cooling demanded by most devices that currently operate at the …
-
-
Wednesday 2nd April 2014 07:45 GMT Michael H.F. Wilkinson
Re: More realistic...
I have seen interesting experiments (by Jaguar, as I recall) with near infra-red (NIR) headlights (apart from the normal ones), a simple CCD camera without IR blocking filter (required for normal visual use), and a jet-fighter style HUD showing the image ahead superimposed on the normal view through the windscreen. I heard some up-market cars now can be ordered with a similar system, but with the HUD replaced by a simple screen on the dashboard. The NOR lights can just shine straight ahead without blinding anyone (except those with (N)IR contact lenses/Google glasses).
-
Wednesday 2nd April 2014 08:04 GMT Voland's right hand
Re: More realistic...
That depends on the IR band as one famous Italian celebrity of the bygone age can testify (she got nailed by this one a couple of decades back during a supposedly innocuous photoshoot).
Hint, the average summer dress is quite transparent in the near IR band.
So if someone comes up with a near IR google glass mod things may get very interesting indeed. If you think that they treat a glasshole badly in a bar now watch what will happen then.
By the way - a lot of sensors and cameras have more than sufficient sensitivity in near IR to do this so it may in fact be just a matter of tweaking the camera firmware to do this.
-
-
Wednesday 2nd April 2014 09:27 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: More realistic...
Early cameras with IR nightvision actually had the "problem" of seeing through thin layers of clothing (problem between quotes because it depends on your point of view obviously).
I am unsure of what exactly they did to solve that, I believe they switched to another wavelength.
-
-
Wednesday 2nd April 2014 11:20 GMT Ed_UK
Re: More realistic...
"a lot of sensors and cameras have more than sufficient sensitivity in near IR"
As DougS also pointed out, this is a useful trick to see if your remote control is working; just pick up that mobile.
Because of the sonsor's intrinsic sensitivity to IR, cameras, webcams, 'phones have IR-rejecting filters. Without the filters, the contrast and relative brightness of objects in the captured image would be messed up. There are some pages on the web showing how to remove the filters and have some IR fun.
BTW - the longer-wavelength IR will have a different focussing point to visible light and the lens won't be optimised for it. It's still on my 'to do' list. Readers old enough to remember 'proper' cameras may have noticed the additional focusing mark for use with IR film.
-
Wednesday 2nd April 2014 20:09 GMT John Brown (no body)
Re: More realistic...
"Hint, the average summer dress is quite transparent in the near IR band."
Yes, my first thought on reading the headline, before I even got to the story, was the camcorder (Sony?) a couple of years back that supposedly could film "through" clothes when used in nightvision mode during daylight (or something like that)
-
-
-
Wednesday 2nd April 2014 08:00 GMT John Smith 19
Re inventing the image orthicon for the 21st century.
Because that's roughly what this is
What always gets me is that the graphene structures are so much smaller than the light they are detecting.
On a general point re-implementing "tube" imaging technology might be a lot easier way to implement "area" devices like imaging or display systems with nanotechnology as most of the components are layers not individually defined devices.
-
-
This topic is closed for new posts.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
