Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Prototype System Blocks Digital Cameras

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the lawyer's-wet-dream dept.

lee1 writes "Researchers at the Georgia Institute of Technology have completed a prototype device that can block digital cameras. The team in the Interactive and Intelligent Computing division of the Georgia Tech College of Computing used off-the-shelf equipment (camera-mounted sensors, lighting equipment, a projector and a computer) to scan for, find and neutralize digital cameras. The system works by looking for the reflectivity and shape of the image sensors and saturating them with a thin beam of visible white light. The principal applications are expected to be protecting areas such as government buildings and trade shows against clandestine photography, stopping unauthorized amateur photography of, for example, shopping-mall Santas (really!) and defeating video copying in theaters. The countermeasure: film." Sounds perfect for copyrighted public spaces.

12 of 494 comments (clear)

  1. My question is... by Solra+Bizna · · Score: 5, Funny

    Does it just "block" the cameras, or does it destroy them?

    Either way, I hope this comes in a personal unit. It'd be a nice way to avoid being photographed at family gatherings.

    -:sigma.SB

    --
    WARN
    THERE IS ANOTHER SYSTEM
    1. Re:My question is... by Cleon · · Score: 5, Funny

      Seems like it just disrupts the pictures taken at the time, which would be very commercially useful. Honestly, I hope it doesn't become very commonplace; I rather enjoy seeing the random crap people take pictures of with their cell phones.

      Personally, I'd rather see cell phone jammers become more common--in restaurants and theaters, especially.

      --
      Gifts for Geeks - Stuff that really matters!
    2. Re:My question is... by dougmc · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Personally, I'd rather see cell phone jammers become more common--in restaurants and theaters, especially.
      Of course, these devices are generally illegal in the US, and probably most other countries.


      You can block the signal, but you can't actively jam it. If you want your movie theater to block cell phone signals, you make it into a faraday cage (which is probably going to be difficult when you need to block microwaves -- just a few inches open is all you need for a signal to get in) and then cell phones won't work.

      If you wanted some extra flexibility in that setup, you could set up some dipole antennas for the various cell phone bands in and out of the shielded movie theater, and set up circuits to connect them inbetween movies and break the connections when the movie starts. That way you could turn it on and off ...

      I'm not saying that this is a good idea, only that it would be legal. (But being able to turn it on and off like that? I'd say it qualifies as clever if nothing else.)

      Personally, I think that technological solutions (jammers, faraday cages) to etiquette problems (talking on your cell phone and disturbing others) are a mistake, and I feel that people who advocate such drastic measures just to prevent themselves from being inconvenienced are more rude than the people they complain about. You don't like the person next to you talking on his cell phone? Don't ask the owners/government to make it so it won't work -- instead, ask the guy to stop, and remind him how rude he's being.

      I'd be mighty angry if I was at the movies, and the babysitter couldn't call me and let me know that my children had hurt themselves and was in ICU at the hospital. Sure, I set the phone to vibrate, but beyond that, if somebody calls me, I want to know about it.

    3. Re:My question is... by Gorshkov · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'd be mighty angry if I was at the movies, and the babysitter couldn't call me and let me know that my children had hurt themselves and was in ICU at the hospital. Sure, I set the phone to vibrate, but beyond that, if somebody calls me, I want to know about it.

      People have been dealing with that just fine since pagers first started coming out.
      When you go to the theater, you leave your pager with an attendant, and he records where you're sitting ..... if something happens, they come in to get you, you LEAVE, and use the phone. All without disturbing anybody else.

      And lets' face it - it's s SHITLOAD more likely that you're gonna get called by some wanker who wants to know if you've picked up the cheese dip for friday's big game thatn to get a call that a close relative just died in a car crash.

      And a partially aborted rant ..... what the bloody hell is people's obsession, with being in touch with the entire world 24/7? What the hell is wrong with NOT being wired for an hour or two?

  2. Sounds perfect for speed cameras by mrbill1234 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    In the UK many fixed speed cameras are digital - as are the automatic number plate (license plate for you americans) recognition for the congestion charging zone in London.

    1. Re:Sounds perfect for speed cameras by mgabrys_sf · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Traffic light cameras in the United States have been playing games with people who have been modifying their plates with additional paints and plastic covers that either impose polarizing refraction or light scattering techniques. The latter is my pick as adding paint that is of a higher reflectivity is nearly impossible to spot with the naked eye (like those of the police) but does quite the scattershot job on them at intersections.

      Note - since the rise of cameras at intersections accidents have nearly doubled in some cases as people slam on the brakes in time for the person behind them to collide with them. But remember - it's safety - not revenue.

      Brought to you by your local police and proection agency: To Serve - and Collect.

  3. Slashdot to Paparazzi: by grogdamighty · · Score: 5, Funny

    Nothing to see here, move along...

    --
    My other sig is funny.
  4. Only detects always-active CCDs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So... SLR-style cameras and cameras using CMOS sensors are invisible to the detector. Nice.

  5. Re:Misuse? by dr_dank · · Score: 5, Funny

    It sounds like it's a technology for the power hungary.

    And just what does the utility company in Budapest have to do with it?

    --
    Where does the school board find them and why do they keep sending them to ME?
  6. So, let's think of the countermeasures... by igb · · Score: 5, Funny
    OK, given thirty seconds, let's think.
    • SLR Camera (that's acknowledged in the article) --- the sensor isn't revealed except during the actual taking of the picture, the rest of the time there's a mirror in the way.
    • Ordinary digicam, but use the optical viewfinder and keep your hand over the lens until you take the picture.
    • If they're using wavelength X for the detection process, just use a filter that blocks that wavelength and work in black and white (perfectly acceptable for most trade show spying)
    • Polarising filter will probably screw things up.
    • Lens Hood would mean the detection system would need to be on-axis.
    • Wear old CCDs as jewelery.
    ian
  7. Source? by iamlucky13 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Note - since the rise of cameras at intersections accidents have nearly doubled in some cases as people slam on the brakes in time for the person behind them to collide with them. But remember - it's safety - not revenue.

    Got a source for that one?

    I'd like to point out that there is a reason the light turns yellow for several seconds before it turns red. Sure, you can always speed up when it would be better to stop so you can make it through the intersection before it technically becomes illegal, but if the guy in front of you doesn't do the same, don't expect blame to fall on him.

    1. Re:Source? by zentinal · · Score: 5, Informative
      Some Sources:

      http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/06/687.asp

      http://pubsindex.trb.org/document/view/default.asp ?lbid=776666

      http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/06/technology/circu its/06came.html?en=8bc6df38e1042a40&ex=1262667600& amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;am p;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;ei=5090&partner= rssuserland&pagewanted=print&position=