PDA

View Full Version : Single-pixel camera could simplify imaging


RobertoOrtiz
10-05-2006, 06:15 PM
Quote:
"
A single-pixel camera that captures complete images by taking many snaps with an array of micro-mirrors could consume less power and produce more compact image files than conventional imaging devices, researchers say.

A conventional digital camera focuses light onto a rectangular array of sensing elements, called pixels, which measure light.

The single-pixel camera developed by researchers Richard Baraniuk and Kevin Kelly at Rice University in Houston, Texas, US, takes a completely different approach. It reflects light from 1024 x 768 micro-mirrors onto a single photodiode. Then it changes the arrangement of micro-mirrors and repeats the process all in a split second.

The camera switches each mirror randomly between one of two positions so that they either reflect light onto the pixel or do not. The current version repeats this process about a thousand times in a second, recording the sensor output as it does. A connected computer then works backwards from the sensor output and mirror positions, to generate a complete image.

The device can direct light at the pixel about a thousand times a second. By analyzing data over several seconds it is possible to generate an image comparable to a compressed image from a one-megapixel camera"

>>LINK<< (http://www.newscientisttech.com/article/dn10233-singlepixel-camera-could-simplify-imaging-.html)

-R

Johny
10-05-2006, 06:40 PM
your a human newspaper, you know that :) ?

this might be a cool aplications , might come really handy, but a single image doent quite make me see what it is capable of doing.

fasteez
10-05-2006, 07:28 PM
i thought it was a joke ...

EnlightenedPixel
10-05-2006, 09:52 PM
Hm,So if 1 pixel = ~ 1 megapixel. Why not use 100 pixels? :D

Or, I suppose technicaly, if you continued to hit that pixel over and over, and re-do itterations, you could use 1 megapixel camera to generate 10-100- or more megapixels. Not sure though.

Roberto, do you work at all, or do you search the internet for the most interesting news articles all day? :D

Szos
10-06-2006, 12:33 AM
so basically this is the same - but opposite - technology as DLP tvs. cool idea.

Mic_Ma
10-06-2006, 01:19 AM
Hm, 1000 times a second = 1000 pixels a second? Very slow shutter speed....you can only photgraph snails...

EnlightenedPixel
10-06-2006, 01:28 AM
Hm, 1000 times a second = 1000 pixels a second? Very slow shutter speed....you can only photgraph snails...

No, I believe it does it more than that. Its saying it repeats the mirror flipping process thousands of times in a single second.

Think MaxwellRender/Indigo/Kerkeythea/FryRender/Vray-PPT, but realtime. It continues to add layer ontop of layer to get a clear image, all within a fraction of a second.

EnlightenedPixel
10-06-2006, 01:31 AM
so basically this is the same - but opposite - technology as DLP tvs. cool idea.
That occured to me later in the day after my innitial comment. This is remarkably like my DLP, but exactly in reverse. Instead of one lightsource and a colorwheel projecting out and being reflected into various directions by flipping mirrors, so you can see an image, its taking the image, flipping it through the mirrors, and hitting a singular source, probably not nearly as fast as how a DLP projects, but it would be interesting to see if they could get it up to that speed.

LucentDreams
10-06-2006, 03:06 AM
exactly what I thought too, reverse DLP, makes perfect sense to me. I can imagine whenthis technology comes out one of the settings to keep an eye out for is how many times a second the mirrors alternate, that woudl suggestly change the range and contrast.

also gotta wonder how much more costly and large these would get for higher res pictures.

parallax
10-06-2006, 07:17 AM
No, I believe it does it more than that. Its saying it repeats the mirror flipping process thousands of times in a single second.


You can believe what you want, but it aint like you think it is. "it repeats the mirror flipping process thousands of times in a single second." because it has to generate a multi-pixel image, doesn't it?
This idea is stupid in this form, because the whole reason behind large imaging sensors is to battle the time issues inherent to digital electronics. A 1 megapixel image would need a million switches a second, and you would end up with a picture exposed for 1 second.

Get the point? 1/1000 exposure would mean a billion switches/second. Imagine 10 megapixel images. To make matters worse, you would end up with pixel 1 being offset by a 0.000000001-1 full second.

The only possible reason to use this tech is to miniturize imaging sensors to the size of a grain of sand.

Segreto
10-06-2006, 07:22 AM
The only possible reason to use this tech is to miniturize imaging sensors to the size of a grain of sand.

makes perfect sense if you're gathering intel. small cameras are great for that kind of thing. not really useful though for professional photographers.

mosconariz
10-07-2006, 07:32 PM
Roberto, do you work at all, or do you search the internet for the most interesting news articles all day? :D

Hehe, yeah, same question here

RobertoOrtiz
10-07-2006, 08:03 PM
OK there is a method to my madness...



And your post is funny because I am at work right now..

(It is a Saturday, but thank God it is a sucky cold and rainy day)

OK since I get this asked a lot I think it is fair I give an overview of how I work.

I have three advantages in my favor,
I have Attention Deficit Disorder, I am great with patterns, and I am a great multitasker.

As anyone who knows me, I am a strong believer in following a schedule.
So that means I plan what I do in detail, and I do it.

During a normal workday I post about 75% of my topics in news/ daily sketch before going to work (it takes me a solid 45 minutes).

When I get to work I concentrate on my office duties, keeping in mind the datelines of the specific projects (this explains why I am here today).

I have a rep at work, and among my commission clients, of finishing projects with crazy datelines. Some very recent examples are: the intranet portal I am coding RIGHT NOW, (due Tuesday) , or the emergency poster map I did yesterday for upper management, or the Hispanic Heritage Month Poster I finished two weeks ago (That one had a two week schedule, that got cut to one).


On the metro I do drawing exercises, wich is great to meet people, (>>LINK<<), (http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?t=309930&page=7&pp=15)read,write, or come up with future mini challenges. Now and then I take my tablet PC and do some photshop work, or modelling.

When I get home, I work on my commission work (web, Illustration, and now some fx work), work on drawing exercises write rules for future challenges, count votes and and before to going to bed I check the web and the site again.


Of course I am watching TV while I am doing all this. And during the day I check the site, no matter the location.

On weekends I sketch like a madman, sometimes I work with local production crews in film shoots, but I am always working.

And yes I do have a social life, I exercises every day, and I do go out... tonight some friends are going Chinese restaurant, and we might go dancing...

I hope that helps
:)

-R
Ps Thanks for the break, have to go back to work, and watching the Star Trek auction...

CGTalk Moderation
10-07-2006, 08:03 PM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.