
Cameras are about to get a lot smaller - spuz
https://www.economist.com/news/science-and-technology/21724796-future-photography-flat-cameras-are-about-get-lot-smaller
======
wallflower
> He was holding a small device in his hand, the size and shape of a lollipop.

"This is a video camera, and this is the precise model that's getting this
incredible image quality. Image quality that holds up to this kind of
magnification. So that's the first great thing. We can now get high-def-
quality resolution in a camera the size of a thumb."

...

"But for now, let's go back to the places in the world where we most need
transparency and so rarely have it. Here's a medley of locations around the
world where we've placed cameras. Now imagine the impact these cameras would
have had in the past, and will have in the future, if similar events
transpire. Here's fifty cameras in Tiananmen Square."

...

"There needs to be accountability. Tyrants can no longer hide. There needs to
be, and will be, documentation and accountability, and we need to bear
witness."

...

ALL THAT HAPPENS MUST BE KNOWN

-From "The Circle" by David Eggers

~~~
mirimir
What good is video evidence, if it can be faked? Having numerous independent
feeds helps, I suppose. But once you have enough perspectives to create a
decent 3D model, you can generate as many fake perspectives as you like.

Also, there are obvious downsides to panopticons.

But none of that matters, I guess. We will have the cameras _and_ the fakes.

~~~
coldtea
> _What good is video evidence, if it can be faked?_

Even better: what good is video evidence if few care?

Consider officers shooting black people. There are several videos of that, but
does it show any sign of stopping? They even walk off without any
repercussions at trial...

And, conversely, when people do care, no extra evidence is needed.

~~~
Shivetya
Actually people do care, especially since there is video. what they still
don't care about that would probably need video as well is the staggering
amount of black on black shooting.

however as a society are we willing to give up that much privacy the moment we
step out the door, where anything and everything could be a recording device.
then again if we are drowning in being observed do we in turn find more
freedom?

~~~
mirimir
With as many cameras as we already have, there isn't much privacy anywhere,
unless we live alone.

I just reread _The Light of Other Days_ by Arthur C. Clarke and Stephen
Baxter. Basically, they argue that group consciousness is the best option
where there is no privacy.

------
ninjakeyboard
Cached text-only copy
[http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:NzxuClC...](http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:NzxuClCIlfEJ:https://www.economist.com/news/science-
and-technology/21724796-future-photography-flat-cameras-are-about-get-lot-
smaller&num=1&hl=en&gl=ca&strip=1&vwsrc=0)

------
kogepathic
> Cameras are about to get a lot smaller

No, scientists have developed a prototype which can take fuzzy photos of
barcodes.

They then go on to tell you what would be necessary to have their device equal
a present day sensor in a phone, but they haven't made one yet.

In fact, no estimate is given for when this technology might be competitive
with CMOS sensors. The article just points to his previous work as proof he
can get some of his ideas to market.

Relevant XKCD: [https://www.xkcd.com/678/](https://www.xkcd.com/678/)

I am excited by advances in camera technology, but this headline is peddling
research as a pending disruption to the industry, and I don't see any evidence
of that in the article.

~~~
regularfry
He's saying he can make a commercial sensor in 5 years. Now, that's admittedly
not saying it'll be in phones in that time, but when it works it won't just be
competitive with CMOS sensors, it'll do things they aren't capable of.

~~~
orbital-decay
There are planar Fourier capture arrays, which are also lensless, can be
implemented with existing CMOS process and seem to be better by every metric
than this. AFAIK they are currently being evaluated for eye tracking sensors
which aren't sensitive to resolution (128x128 is enough) but need to be flat.

There are also single-pixel compressed sensing cameras, which can be made
lensless as well and are limited by the optical modulator specs.

The problem with lensless sensors is always the computing power required to
reconstruct the final image.

~~~
regularfry
Admittedly I'm reading between the lines here, but I suspect that these don't
need computationally expensive reconstruction. The reconstruction is done
entirely by setting up the delays correctly on the input sensors, then the
image is formed by simple interference. You'd read the image off just like an
ordinary ccd.

~~~
vel0city
From the article:

"He concedes that there are challenges: improving the optical performance of
the elements; suppressing spillover effects between different signals in the
device; and honing the algorithms that calibrate the camera’s performance."

The line of "honing the algorithms" is the complexity orbital-decay is
referencing. These types of sensors do need computationally expensive
reconstruction to generate images we're used to seeing with traditional optics
and sensors currently found in many consumer devices. The filtering and
focusing work the lenses do still needs to happen. These sensors essentially
rely on complex math to replace the finely ground glass.

~~~
regularfry
Those algorithms are already very well understood from radar and sonar,
though. It's not like he's starting from scratch.

And I'd take issue with the characterisation that they need "complex math to
replace the finely ground glass" \- what replaces the glass is the analogue
photon detection, delay, and amplification channel on the front end. My
suspicion is that the only "complex math" is done calculating the delays
before capturing the image, not doing the reconstruction (again, unless I've
missed something unique about moving from GHz to THz).

------
ChuckMcM
This is very much on the path I've seen in software defined radio (SDR). I am
particularly interested to see when they invert atmospheric interference in
real time. A telescope or spotting scope with a co-linear laser visible to the
circuit should be sufficient. Then no shimmering heatwaves in the distance,
just a clear picture.

------
leke
Some ingredients for a always recording society...

\- Super cheap and gigantic capacity storage.

\- Wireless network like 5G.

\- Wireless charging.

\- Nano cameras.

I think there was a Black Mirror episode about this.

~~~
stefanpie
Well there was white bear which was more of a philosophical debate and then
there was Most Hated in the Nation which I think really hits home the
development of small new technologies such as cameras and the consequences of
keeping their power and security unchecked.

~~~
swashbuck1r
There was also The Entire History of You - where everything you see is
recorded and can be played back at any time - leading us to hyper-focus on
details from the past rather than experiencing the present.

------
amelius
Could this enable a light-field camera? [1]

[1] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light-
field_camera](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light-field_camera)

------
astrostl
Sensor SIZE is still the primary determination of quality. Not seeing how this
changed that.

------
anta40
When will this ready to replace my 35mm, full frame camera?

:D

~~~
regularfry
He's talking about an optical phased array system. Once it's working,
competing with a 35mm system "should" (famous last words) be a matter of
scaling up the number of elements to match the lens size. The thing is, once
that happens, it's got a huge advantage: it doesn't need any other lenses. At
all. Any "lens" you could want is a software configuration away.

~~~
leemailll
is there already a model on sale? Like lytro?

~~~
spuz
No, the technology demonstrated is only capable of imaging 8x8 pixels. Here's
a link to the actual research: [http://www.caltech.edu/news/ultra-thin-camera-
creates-images...](http://www.caltech.edu/news/ultra-thin-camera-creates-
images-without-lenses-78731)

------
taw55
I don't think I fully grasped the explanation, it's like some sort of slit-
scan pinhole camera? Aren't those images going to be super noisy compared to
lensed cameras with larger sensors?

------
roryisok
On mobile, for me at least, the text content of this article disappears when
the page has fully loaded. Anyone else? This isn't the first time I've seen
this sort of thing happen

~~~
stevenh
economist.com brilliantly bans you from accessing their site after you've
clicked a few of their links. The text vanishes because they've sloppily
hacked this limitation in client-side by checking a cookie after the page
finishes loading. This leaves 99% of visitors thinking that the site is
broken, so they leave without ever noticing the message about how they need to
pay a ransom to unban themselves.

For sites like this, you can sometimes archive the URL to evade the ban.

[http://archive.is/Ni7Lo](http://archive.is/Ni7Lo)

~~~
wj
OT: I think it is a bit of a jump to equate subscribing to paying a ransom.

~~~
laser
It's a bit like a ransom when they load the article at first, you start
reading, and then the text disappears asking for payment. Fortunately, The
Economist seems to just use cookies so you can still view the articles
incognito.

------
mproud
Escape the article limit garbage by using Private Browsing and the like.

------
Hydraulix989
RIP Privacy

------
bwang29
It seems like economist uses Javascript to create the "You've reached your
article limit" dialogue. Simple press ESC key to stop JS from executing on
Chrome so that you can read the article.

Also here is my TL:DR summary of it if you're still trying to fight through
the pay wall:

There is a thing called grating coupler that works like little high frequency
antennas that receives light signals. When you put a whole array of them you
will be able to do various scans of light signals to simulate the camera
pointing at different direction, or fisheye, telephoto effects without the
need of tilting or moving the surface of the array. The underlying computation
relies on the ability to calculate and control the timing of signal travelled
from each antennas, plus some classic signal interference and phasing issues.
An 1cm x 1cm array will contain 1 million such couplers which would create a
similar sized image as an iPhone 7 rear camera, but since there is no lens
involved, the camera can be made a lot thinner.

~~~
mtgx
Using the Brave browser with the block scripts option enabled seems to work,
too.

