Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
Thread started 19 Jun 2006 (Monday) 07:28
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Technology to disable digital cameras on the horizon

 
ronmayhew
Goldmember
Avatar
1,477 posts
Joined Feb 2005
Location: Gainesville, Georgia, USA
     
Jun 19, 2006 07:28 |  #1

:evil: I ran across this news article in Yahoo News.

http://news.yahoo.com/​s/space/20060619/sc_sp​ace/newdevicedisablesd​igitalcameras (external link)


I wonder if they will post these things around Niagra Falls, or Yosimite.

I guess 35mm will make a come back.


flickr (external link)
Canon: 70D, 16-35L, 50mm f/1.4, 85mm f/1.8, 100mm f/2.0, 75-300mm IS, 35-350L :cool:, 135mm f/2.0L, Pro9000 .
Sigma: 70-200mm f/2.8; Alien Bees: B1600
Tamron: 17-50mm, 28-75mm, 90mm fMacro,

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
ZuluCB
Member
Avatar
30 posts
Joined May 2006
Location: Okinawa, Japan
     
Jun 19, 2006 07:33 |  #2

Think about SLR's though. They use a mirror thus only exposing the sensor for a split second when taking the picture. It wouldn't be feasable that these devices would be able to block an SLR from taking pictures. This is more useful for P&S and video cameras. Also they surely wouldn't put these up in national parks etc, but I can understand movie theatres and other places that would benefit.

Don't be worried. :)


Literally just starting out.
Equipment: Kodak EasyShare DX6490 (I know, sad.)
On The Way: Canon EOS 30D + grip, EF 50mm f/1.4, kit lens, MacBook :D

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
GyRob
Cream of the Crop
9,966 posts
Likes: 405
Joined Feb 2005
Location: N.E.LINCOLNSHIRE UK.
     
Jun 19, 2006 07:40 |  #3

mm good time to invent an anti "you can't stop my censor working filter"
Rob.


"The LensMaster Gimbal"
http://www.lensmaster.​co.uk/rh1.htm (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MazerRakhm
Colonel Mustard
Avatar
2,277 posts
Joined May 2004
Location: Near Chicago, IL
     
Jun 19, 2006 07:52 |  #4

I read about this a while ago and it was aimed mostly at movie theaters to stop film piracy. I think an outdoor site such as the falls or a big national park would just be unfeasable for this type of technology.

I can see them scanning a small space such as a movie theater, but a wide open space? The price alone would probably be prohibitive to such an undertaking.


Thanks for looking!
-Kevin
Monkeys are the key to the universe. Since I couldn't find an Oompa Loompa, I am employing monkeys to porter my equipment and be my assistants.
Pearls of Wisdom...
Now remember Ralphie, if you're nose bleeds; you're either picking it too much or not enough. - Chief Wiggam
30D, Kit lens, 70-200 f2.8L, Nifty 50, 16-35 f2.8L
***ksmith.smugmug.com (external link) *** LiveJournal Blog (external link)***SportsShooter Member (external link)***

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ZuluCB
Member
Avatar
30 posts
Joined May 2006
Location: Okinawa, Japan
     
Jun 19, 2006 08:14 as a reply to  @ GyRob's post |  #5

gyrob wrote:
mm good time to invent an anti "you can't stop my censor working filter"
Rob.

And someone will do it too if these things get widespread!


Literally just starting out.
Equipment: Kodak EasyShare DX6490 (I know, sad.)
On The Way: Canon EOS 30D + grip, EF 50mm f/1.4, kit lens, MacBook :D

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
who ­ me?
Senior Member
326 posts
Joined Dec 2003
Location: Fullerton, CA
     
Jun 19, 2006 08:59 |  #6

Hmmmm....
Good thing I still have my film cameras....:D


If you try to fail and succeed, what have you really done??
Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
buffalophotographer
Senior Member
306 posts
Joined Dec 2005
Location: Buffalo, NY
     
Jun 19, 2006 09:43 |  #7

I would actually appreciate it as a wedding professional. I set up the poses and before I can snap a shot there are 10 people snapping away with no regards.


1Ds2 , 1d2n , 5d , / 24-70 f2.8 / 70-200 f2.8 , 28-300 IS / 50mm f1.4 / 85mm f1.8 / 15mm Fisheye / 14mm Sigma / -----Kodak 14n /

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tbrasington
Senior Member
Avatar
269 posts
Joined Oct 2005
Location: London,Uk
     
Jun 19, 2006 09:59 |  #8

The article says it affects CCD sensors, I thought Canon's had a CMOS sensor?


7D | Speedlite 430 EX | 17-35mm f/2.8 L| 24-70mm f/2.8 L | Sigma 30mm f/1.4 | Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Keiffer
Goldmember
Avatar
2,259 posts
Joined May 2005
Location: Orlando Fl.
     
Jun 19, 2006 09:59 |  #9

Yeah thiefs and robbers, especially bank robber would love to get their hands on something like this. This is where technology bites the ones that are trying to thwart something else. Gotta love it:-)



http://kcschoeppler.fo​topic.net (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RossW
Senior Member
804 posts
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Chester County, PA USA
     
Jun 19, 2006 10:12 |  #10

Oh, sure... they're gonna shine a "thin beam of white light" back at the audience in a movie theatre? <cue Blinded by the Light> Can't wait for those happy patrons' lawsuits. Whole thing sounds like a crock to me.


S2IS
30D; 24-85 EF; 70-300 EF IS; 50 1.4 EF
and a much-beloved old FTb 35mm!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nadtz
Goldmember
Avatar
1,483 posts
Joined Dec 2005
     
Jun 19, 2006 10:42 |  #11

Well the article is pretty specific. At the moment its for small critical areas, and it doesnt sound like the beam is indiscriminate about where it is used. I see no reason this would be used somewhere like a national park, and Im sure it would be equipment reliant and (at least for now) not portable. As I have never taken a camera into a movie theater with the intention of using it (on those rare occasions Im at a movie theater) I cant say this sounds like anything to be worried about. Not like thats going to stop piracy of course, but thats another matter.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BillsBayou
In trouble with my wife
Avatar
5,018 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Mar 2006
Location: New Orleans, La. USA! Favorite Cheese: Caciocavallo Invention: Incendiary Spit-Bomb Wait. What?
     
Jun 19, 2006 12:22 |  #12

I'm plagued with questioins.

Foremost on my mind is the "thin beam of white light." What if you're in a show and the person next to you, side/front/rear, is the target of the light. Will you be affected by this light?

Also, look for people using decoys. I can't imagine this device is going to have too many beam projectors. Just show up with a couple of mirrors and you'll keep it busy while videotaping the screen. Of course, spitballs work very nice too.

The best pirated movies are captured after-hours in cooperation with corrupt projectionists. They'll know where the CCD-jammers are and how to disable/defeat them. This won't work.

As for the anti-Santa camera-deflector? Just how much is this device going to cost? I don't see a scanner aiming thin beams of white light around the audience as something that'll be cheap to own/operate. Further, the best time to take the picture is when the photographer is telling your kids to smile. That's when they'll turn it off and you'll fire your shots.

Oh, and when this goes from visible light to IR? Just tell the nimrods that you're bathing their kids in IR light when they're coming to visit Santa. Someone will think it's harmful and there'll be an uproar. :)

I'm thinking that a mirror covered jacket would be a unique fasion statement for theaters. You'd hear that damned jamming device stripping it's gears trying to keep up with all the false positives.


Take only pictures, leave only footprints...
"Cameras don't shoot people. Photographers shoot people." - Me
I must not break rule GN.4, Please help me un-see that photo, I must not break rule GN.4...
Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BillsBayou
In trouble with my wife
Avatar
5,018 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Mar 2006
Location: New Orleans, La. USA! Favorite Cheese: Caciocavallo Invention: Incendiary Spit-Bomb Wait. What?
     
Jun 19, 2006 12:43 |  #13

Ok, I've done a little research of my own. I did a Google of the name "Jay Summet" from the article.

Here's his resume: http://www-static.cc.gatech.edu/~​summetj/cv.html (external link)
For a laugh, take note of what he worked on during the Summer of 2005.

Here is HIS page on the concept of the device:
http://www-static.cc.gatech.edu/~​summetj/cre/index.html (external link)
It still looks fairly cheesy. Essentially, they'll just bathe the audicence with rapidly cycling IR light.

And his paper: (in PDF format) http://www-static.cc.gatech.edu …s/truongk-ubicomp2005.pdf (external link)
Abstract from the paper:

Abstract. With the ubiquity of camera phones, it is now possible to capture
digital still and moving images anywhere, raising a legitimate concern for many
organizations and individuals. Although legal and social boundaries can curb
the capture of sensitive information, it sometimes is neither practical nor
desirable to follow the option of confiscating the capture device from an
individual. We present the design and proof of concept implementation of a
capture-resistant environment that prevents the recording of still and moving
images without requiring any cooperation on the part of the capturing device or
its operator. Our solution involves a tracking system that uses computer vision
for locating any number of retro-reflective CCD or CMOS camera sensors in a
protected area. A pulsing light is then directed at the lens, distorting any
imagery the camera records. Although the directed light interferes with the
camera's operation, it can be designed to minimally impact the sight of other
humans in the environment.

The part "it sometimes is neither practical nor
desirable to follow the option of confiscating the capture device from an
individual." is true because, unless you is da law, you're not getting anything out of my possession.

There are some interesting points in the paper that deal with known weaknesses to the system.

The one that is obvious to me is that someone has published an article on the Internet about this system while it is still just a cheesy graduate student's dream.


Take only pictures, leave only footprints...
"Cameras don't shoot people. Photographers shoot people." - Me
I must not break rule GN.4, Please help me un-see that photo, I must not break rule GN.4...
Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Jon
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
69,628 posts
Likes: 218
Joined Jun 2004
Location: Bethesda, MD USA
     
Jun 19, 2006 12:43 |  #14

Hey, let 'em move to IR. The EOS DSLRs have a pretty effective IR-cutoff filter in them. I rather suspect this is going to be aimed more at video cameras. It'd have to be able to detect and fire off in 1/200 sec. or better for a DSLR. It'd also have to be strong enough to overcome daylight for it to be any good at all in the outdoors.


Jon
----------
Cocker Spaniels
Maryland and Virginia activities
Image Posting Rules and Image Posting FAQ
Report SPAM, Don't Answer It! (link)
PERSONAL MESSAGING REGARDING SELLING OR BUYING ITEMS WITH MEMBERS WHO HAVE NO POSTS IN FORUMS AND/OR WHO YOU DO NOT KNOW FROM FORUMS IS HEREBY DECLARED STRICTLY STUPID AND YOU WILL GET BURNED.
PAYPAL GIFT NO LONGER ALLOWED HERE

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BillsBayou
In trouble with my wife
Avatar
5,018 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Mar 2006
Location: New Orleans, La. USA! Favorite Cheese: Caciocavallo Invention: Incendiary Spit-Bomb Wait. What?
     
Jun 19, 2006 13:28 as a reply to  @ Jon's post |  #15

Jon wrote:
}It'd have to be able to detect and fire off in 1/200 sec. or better for a DSLR. It'd also have to be strong enough to overcome daylight for it to be any good at all in the outdoors.

According to their paper on this, they haven't gotten around to testing against SLRs and have actually DISCOUNTED THE THREAT posed by digital SLRs.

They also admit a failing in outdoor photography.


Take only pictures, leave only footprints...
"Cameras don't shoot people. Photographers shoot people." - Me
I must not break rule GN.4, Please help me un-see that photo, I must not break rule GN.4...
Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

1,817 views & 0 likes for this thread
Technology to disable digital cameras on the horizon
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is thisisntme
815 guests, 302 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.