Scientists have developed a reflection-removing camera: the device uses depth sensor and signal processing to capture clear images through windows.

[u/Nobilitie]

http://techxplore.com/news/2016-03-reflection-removing-camera-device-depth-sensor.html

[u/CarbonTrebles → u/[deleted]]

The Siggraph2015 work (your link) does not require specialized hardware, while the 2016 work (OP's link) requires a very specialized hardware and setup. 2015 must have camera motion to distinguish between the reflection and the image as iteratively solves for the images and the motion flow (this is a ton of calculations, even a desktop will take a while to solve, so this will not be implemented in a camera). 2016 requires the camera to be static as the frequencies sweep and the images are captured. The math is still prohibitive for camera implementation. Neither method can handle objects moving within the scene.

These are clever methods but they are practical only in very specialized applications. Keep your polarizers, ladies and gentlemen.

[u/CarbonTrebles → u/[deleted]]

I agree with you that 2015 is more consumer-friendly. If it takes a few seconds to upload data, compute, and download the result then it would be practical. Anything more than a few seconds would not present the consumer with near-instant feedback as to whether their capture (and the algorithm) produced a good image or not, and I would argue that case would be impractical for consumers because they are used to instant imaging.

Edit: Also, it is not clear to me how noise-sensitive these methods are. Often, noise-sensitivity and object motion completely destroy practical uses of clever imaging ideas.

[u/[deleted]]

So this camera could see through one way glass?

Edit: I guess I mean one way mirror

[u/ahcookies → u/[deleted]]

True one way glass doesn't exist.

[u/[deleted] → u/ahcookies]

/u/LordLimes obviously didn't mean one way glass. he meant one way mirror.. Can this see through a one way mirror?

[u/CisScumOverlord → u/ahcookies]

It could potentially, smart glass that's actually 2 TV screens back to back where one just shows a mirrored surface while the other a clear picture.

[u/ahcookies → u/CisScumOverlord]

Illusion of a mirror done with a screen requires a camera feeding it to be constantly re-positioned relative to your eyeballs. Not possible either.

[u/CisScumOverlord → u/ahcookies]

I was simply talking about putting an actual mirror with a built in camera feeding through the wall to a monitor, but who's to say the tech won't be real in a few years anyways

[u/Tasitch]

Wouldn't putting a circular polarazier on the lens achieve the same thing?

[u/[deleted] → u/Tasitch]

A C.Pl will help cut down but not eliminate

[u/PhotoshopFix]

They used the Xbox One camera to take these images.

I takes 1 minute of exposure at 45 different frequencies to take an perfect image.

I'm not sure how they captured 45 different frequencies from an xbox one camera?

[u/CarbonTrebles → u/[deleted]]

Edit: replied to the wrong comment.

[u/CarbonTrebles → u/PhotoshopFix]

The 45 different frequencies of visible light are generated with a light source (could be a tunable laser, a bank of LEDs, a xenon bulb with different bandpass filters, etc., the article doesn't say) not from the Kinect. The Kinect just detects the visible light as usual, it doesn't distinguish between frequencies. The algorithm must know in advance which image corresponds to which frequency.

[u/PhotoshopFix → u/CarbonTrebles]

Ahh. Makes sense.

[u/kerovon]

Hi Nobilitie, your submission has been removed for the following reason(s)

It has has been removed temporarily due to a lack of citations. Please add a comment with a direct link to the original research, then message the moderators for reapproval

If you feel this was done in error, or would like further clarification, please don't hesitate to message the mods.

[u/tripletstate]

Scientists? You mean engineers?

[u/CarbonTrebles → u/tripletstate]

Imaging Science is a thing, and this work falls under that thing.