Liquid Lenses For Camera Phones

Roland Piquepaille writes "In this article, the Register writes that "camera phones will soon have lenses made from nothing more substantial than a couple of drops of oil and water, but will still be capable of auto focusing, and even zooming in on subjects." The lenses, developed by the French company Varioptic, contain drops of oil and water, acting respectively as conductor and insulator, and sandwiched between two windows. These liquid lenses could replace glass or plastic ones because of several advantages: no moving parts, leading to better reliability; a very small power consumption; very small dimensions (diameter: 8mm; thickness: 2mm); and a very fast response time of 2/100th of a second. You can expect the first camera phones using these liquid lenses as early as Christmas 2005. These lenses might also appear in medical equipment, such as endoscopes, optical networking equipment or surveillance devices. This overview contains other details and references."

Comments

Durability

[fembots]

This company was only founded two years ago, I wonder how much has been put into testing the quality and durability of the oil, which is subject to voltage going through it every now and then. However given the rate people change their mobile phones, durability might not have to be a feature.

Other than that, it's a great invention, no wonder the guy will pursue an aggressive intellectual property strategy, so anyone who wants to build something like this will need a licence from them.

There's also a mentiond of true zoom capability, using two of the liquid lenses. Wouldn't that defeat the purpose of being very small, since you need more depth to create the zooming effect, no?

Re:Durability

[harrkev]

Wouldn't that defeat the purpose of being very small, since you need more depth to create the zooming effect, no?

Yes, it would. Bit it would still be a lot smaller than having a tiny threaded barrel, a tiny motor, tiny gears, etc. So it would need some length, but probably a lot less than the alternatives.

The only thing that worries me is how well something like this would handle shock. If you drop you phone, what if a small drop of oil broke off and was then floating around in the water. Maybe shaking it would get it to merge back again, or maybe not.

Other than that, it's a great invention, no wonder the guy will pursue an aggressive intellectual property strategy, so anyone who wants to build something like this will need a licence from them.

I believe that I remember reading about this concept in the original Star Wars movie novelization (or maybe it was some other book, but I DID read it a long time ago in a city far, far away). So the concept is not new. Making it work is. I have no doubt that the particular materials and methods used are definately covered by patent, but I wonder if somebody came up with a different method of using oil lenses, if they could use the "prior art" of sci-if?

Re:Durability

[jdray]

I believe that I remember reading about this concept in the original Star Wars movie...

I was thinking one of the Dune novels. I've heard of it too, and I've never read a Star Wars novel.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:sigh

[Rude Turnip]

This is the kind of stuff that patents were intended for...novel inventions. Moreover, by the context of that quote, they are focusing (no pun intended) on a specific way of building such a lense...again in the true spirit of what patents are for.

Roland?

[WhatAmIDoingHere]

I wonder how much he paid for this article.

Zooming

[EmbeddedJanitor]

Two of these lenses will still be considerably smaller than two glass lenses so a zoom lens will be much smaller.

On mobile phone cameras quality is not a huge deal but I am still rather skeptical about use in medical equipment though. Medical stuff needs to be far more precise and hold its precision over a long time. "Hard stuff" like glass will be hard to displace with sqishy lenses.

Biomedical, but patented

[Anonymous Coward]

Artificial eyes and camera capable of very fast, accurate focus could be built from these. But they have patented the technology (such as it is) up the ying/yang. What this means is they are now sitting on their duffs, waiting for money to roll in. They technology could be improved and create real breakthroughs...but it's patented, so those good ideas will languish for your great great great great grandchildren. When the patent expires in 2196, the technology will be improved, patented again, and improved again in 2305 when that patent expires. Millions could have benefited from it in the interum, but alas, why improve things when you can patent and stifle?

Re:Biomedical, but patented

[sugar and acid]

"Artificial eyes and camera capable of very fast, accurate focus could be built from these. But they have patented the technology (such as it is) up the ying/yang. What this means is they are now sitting on their duffs, waiting for money to roll in. They technology could be improved and create real breakthroughs...but it's patented, so those good ideas will languish for your great great great great grandchildren."

What are you talking about. If someone could make it work as an artificial lens for an eye they can licence the patent. This is a positive patent, the company spent money and came up with a working and truly innovative product that has many uses. Now they have patent protection to commercialise it. To make a profit they actually have to sell something, thus the more applications that can use the technology, the more profit they will make. So there is a profit drive for this company to come up with as many useful applications of their technology as possible while they still have patent protection. Hardly stifling innovation. This is how patents are supposed to work.

Re:Biomedical, but patented

[vespazzari]

um... so why dont they just license them, and not have to worry about the cost of R&D for a lense for an artificial eye. Also, i belive that the patent expires in 20 years not 192, correct me if i am wrong. These guys put time and money into developing this technology, why should they not reap the rewards? what would happen if they were not allowed to have exclusive rights over thier invention for a set amount of time? Maybe then they could try selling thier idea, and in doing so, whoever they attemted to sell thier idea to could just steal the idea and use it without having to pay the licensing. That would really encourage me to invest my time and/or money into some research so that it can be stolen from me without me getting a penny or legal recourse. What would you suggest they do?

What about prosthetic uses?

[beef curtains]

From my (very, very shallow) understanding of the technology, it sounds like it could do pretty well (in theory, at least) in "prosthetic-eye/lens-type" uses...at least for people with lens-dengenerative issues.

Prior art?

[dtmos]

I wonder how Philips feels about it.

Re:Humidity, physical contact, etc.

[badmammajamma]

I don't think this is an issue. However, I do wonder how the lense would respond in cold weather. The 2/100th of a second is only going to be valid for certain temperature ranges.

um.

[Anonymous Coward]

A really small image sensor requires a really short focal lenght, which translates itself into a really small lens, which further translates itself into a very big depth of field. This means that the area behind and in front of the plane of focus that's sharp is large, and that accurate focus is very often not needed.

Therefore, I'm not yet impressed by the claim that this lens can be focused without moving parts. First I'd need to be convinced that it needs to be focused at all, for the intended application.

Re:sigh

[Jeff DeMaagd]

I'd say this probably is a good patent, within the original intent of patenting. The real problem with the patent system is that it is abused that many patents go against the patent law.