Crave privacy? New tech knocks out digital cameras

(continued from previous page)

invention could be used.

"If it is a big exhibit hall, it is impossible to confiscate all of the cameras," said Patel.

How it works
The Georgia Tech system essentially exploits the "retroreflective" property of digital camera lenses. When light strikes a retroreflective surface, a portion of the light bounces back to the original source. While eyeglasses, bottles, watches and other glass surfaces are retroreflective, a coating on virtually all digital camera lenses puts cameras in a class of their own.

"The film atop lenses (is) highly reflective," said Patel. "A lot of people probably have known this but they haven't thought about leveraging it."

In this system, a device bathes the region in front of it with infrared light. When an intense retroreflection indicates the presence of a digital camera lens, the device then fires a localized beam of light directly at that point. Thus, the picture gets washed out.

The neutralizing light continues until the camera lens can no longer be detected, which prevents video cameras from capturing clear footage.

For added security, the system emits light beams in a pattern that prevents cameras from compensating for the light. (In the lab prototype, the video camera, with its built-in infrared beam, serves as the camera detector, while the projector is the neutralizer.)

The technology can detect and block multiple cameras and works on cameras with either CCD or CMOS imagers, which are used in the vast majority of digital cameras.

The neutralizing light is also highly focused to minimize distractions. "We only light up pixels where the reflection is coming from," Patel said.

More work lies ahead for the researchers. The current implementation works indoors and only up to certain distances--it's effective at a range of up to 10 meters and covers a 45-degree area. Cameras close to the detector and at a sharp angle can fall into an undetectable dead zone. Fast shutter speeds might also present some challenges, as do filters, though it turns out that the camera detector can spot lenses cloaked with infrared filters.

While the prototype relies on a digital projector for the neutralizing light source, the group believes it can also use a laser pointer and two mirrors to foil photographers.

"That will make it a lot cheaper to do," Patel said.

The prototype is also rather indiscriminate--it knocks out whatever it believes to be a camera. Some companies have released antiphotography tools, but those tools work only if the camera or cell phone has a Bluetooth chip--and then only if the gadgets are preprogrammed to shut down when the chip receives a "no photographs" message.

So the broad nature of the Georgia Tech system is a good thing, Patel said. "It doesn't require cooperation of the camera."

[donpro]

I don't think so

I don't think shining a very bright light into a crowd of people is a very good idea. What happens if the unit malfunctions and shines the light into someone's eyes based upon a reflection from their eyeglasses. This had better work 100% or its going to make a lot of lawyers very happy.

[taznar]

Which bright light?

You seem to be worried about the bright light to be focused on the
camera. I'm wondering if they've done a safety analysis on
continously bathing with infrared light. Granted, its the less
dangerous part of the spectrum, but IIRC its still pretty good at
warming up things that absorb it.

So, what intensity of infrared are they going to be shining
continously into the eyes of the people around the "celebrity"?
Could add new meaning to the term star-struck.

[Sam Papelbon]

this will just be annoying

could you imagine if a celebrity was wearing one of these while walking the red carpet at a movie premiere or something? with all the photographers it would make the celebrity look like a human disco ball. plus it wouldn't work if it was blocked by their clothes or something. they'd have to have a silly looking hat with this device mounted on top to block all directions. you could still get photos from the back and possibly the side. if they turn their heads you could still get their face. maybe they could mount it on the tip of their nose, that would make an interesting light show in the previously mentioned movie premiere example

[donpro]

I don't think so

I don't think shining a very bright light into a crowd of people is a very good idea. What happens if the unit malfunctions and shines the light into someone's eyes based upon a reflection from their eyeglasses. This had better work 100% or its going to make a lot of lawyers very happy.

[taznar]

Which bright light?

You seem to be worried about the bright light to be focused on the
camera. I'm wondering if they've done a safety analysis on
continously bathing with infrared light. Granted, its the less
dangerous part of the spectrum, but IIRC its still pretty good at
warming up things that absorb it.

So, what intensity of infrared are they going to be shining
continously into the eyes of the people around the "celebrity"?
Could add new meaning to the term star-struck.

[Sam Papelbon]

this will just be annoying

could you imagine if a celebrity was wearing one of these while walking the red carpet at a movie premiere or something? with all the photographers it would make the celebrity look like a human disco ball. plus it wouldn't work if it was blocked by their clothes or something. they'd have to have a silly looking hat with this device mounted on top to block all directions. you could still get photos from the back and possibly the side. if they turn their heads you could still get their face. maybe they could mount it on the tip of their nose, that would make an interesting light show in the previously mentioned movie premiere example

[jasonemanuelson1]

Good in concept, not real life

Another solution that is less obtrusive to others is infrared
lights. They can do the same job, but without being visible to
the naked eye. LED technologies are making some pretty cool
alternatives for ordinary incandescent light sources. I would love
to see them develop high-output infrared LEDs that would make
this all possible.

But, for those really wanting to avoid the eye, an EMP is about
the only solution for large open areas, but I don't think the local
authorities, nor the national would like this too much!

[jasonemanuelson1]

Good in concept, not real life

Another solution that is less obtrusive to others is infrared
lights. They can do the same job, but without being visible to
the naked eye. LED technologies are making some pretty cool
alternatives for ordinary incandescent light sources. I would love
to see them develop high-output infrared LEDs that would make
this all possible.

But, for those really wanting to avoid the eye, an EMP is about
the only solution for large open areas, but I don't think the local
authorities, nor the national would like this too much!

[jasonemanuelson1]

Sorry, dang news.com

Their submit page kept erring out, showing I had not posted a
comment, even though it was. My sincere apologies for the
waste and annoyance...

[Christopher Hall]

I think the site's broken

I seem to be getting a lot of page errors, slow loads, and "this page cannot be found" errors. What gives?

[pencoyd]

Cleaned up a bit

Sorry about the submit page errors. I cleared out the duplicate entries for you.

If there are problems, I'd very much like to know about them, with any/all details possible.

My email is my first name then a dot then my last name @ cnet.com.

Thanks for reading, and posting, and sorry for any glitches.

John Roberts
CNET News.com product development

[jasonemanuelson1]

Sorry, dang news.com

Their submit page kept erring out, showing I had not posted a
comment, even though it was. My sincere apologies for the
waste and annoyance...

[Christopher Hall]

I think the site's broken

I seem to be getting a lot of page errors, slow loads, and "this page cannot be found" errors. What gives?

[pencoyd]

Cleaned up a bit

Sorry about the submit page errors. I cleared out the duplicate entries for you.

If there are problems, I'd very much like to know about them, with any/all details possible.

My email is my first name then a dot then my last name @ cnet.com.

Thanks for reading, and posting, and sorry for any glitches.

John Roberts
CNET News.com product development

[Spimby]

What about conventional cameras?

Would a disposable 35mm camera still work? Sounds like it. So I can just scan the photo in later. Also, I wonder if a filter on a digital camera's lens would defeat this system.

[qazwiz]

yep

They were very specific... it only affects digital cameras (it detects the electronics that does the actual recording)

[Spimby]

What about conventional cameras?

Would a disposable 35mm camera still work? Sounds like it. So I can just scan the photo in later. Also, I wonder if a filter on a digital camera's lens would defeat this system.

[qazwiz]

yep

They were very specific... it only affects digital cameras (it detects the electronics that does the actual recording)

[walterwood]

Defeat this with a non-coated camera lens

This seems very easy to defeat. Since it relies on a coating found on camera lenses, simply use a non-coated lens -a very low tech solution.

[mahuti]

Or...

Or, use a reflective camera lens, with a piece of less-reflective film
over the lens.

Way to design something useless guys... Think of easy ways to
hack your inventions next time.

[Gabey8]

What if there's more than one camera

Can this device only detect and respond to one camera at a time pointing at it? In that case, a "tag team" of two cameras at once will probably produce one usable photo and one unusable one.

[walterwood]

Defeat this with a non-coated camera lens

This seems very easy to defeat. Since it relies on a coating found on camera lenses, simply use a non-coated lens -a very low tech solution.

[mahuti]

Or...

Or, use a reflective camera lens, with a piece of less-reflective film
over the lens.

Way to design something useless guys... Think of easy ways to
hack your inventions next time.

[Gabey8]

What if there's more than one camera

Can this device only detect and respond to one camera at a time pointing at it? In that case, a "tag team" of two cameras at once will probably produce one usable photo and one unusable one.

[heystoopid]

Question?

Question how effective is it, with a simple polarised lens filter?

[heystoopid]

Question?

Question how effective is it, with a simple polarised lens filter?

Nothing new here

TSCM technicians have known this for years and have used purpose built devices as well as devices of their own making (which are much cheaper I might add).

Nothing new here

TSCM technicians have known this for years and have used purpose built devices as well as devices of their own making (which are much cheaper I might add).

What about the sun?

I shoot landscapes with the sun in the frame all the time and my camera is far from blinded. So how bright is this light?

What about the sun?

I shoot landscapes with the sun in the frame all the time and my camera is far from blinded. So how bright is this light?

[zaznet]

What about Elis?

If Elvis enters the room, the device would be trying to blind all his rhine stones and unable to find the cameras.

This thing is likely easily defeated.

[zaznet]

What about Elis?

If Elvis enters the room, the device would be trying to blind all his rhine stones and unable to find the cameras.

This thing is likely easily defeated.

[walt9876]

could be fun...

I wonder if lens filters made specifically for digital cameras have the same coating. If so, you could attach a bunch to your clothes or jacket. What a light show you would create when you walked in!

[walt9876]

could be fun...

I wonder if lens filters made specifically for digital cameras have the same coating. If so, you could attach a bunch to your clothes or jacket. What a light show you would create when you walked in!