Remix clone Hacker News

Those images are certainly impressive, but I certainly don't agree with the statement "equal in quality to those produced by conventional cameras": they're quite obviously lacking in sharpness and color.

▲

neom 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

conventional ultra thin lens cameras are mostly endoscopes, so it's up against this: https://www.endoscopy-campus.com/wp-content/uploads/Neuroend...

▲

jvanderbot 4 days ago | parent [-]

Just curious, what am I looking at here?

	▲	neom 4 days ago \| parent \| next [-]
		my education is on the imaging side not the medical side but I believe this: https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/neuroendocrin... + this: https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/176036-overview?form=... - looks like it was shot with this: https://vet-trade.eu/enteroscope/218-olympus-enteroscope-sif...
	▲	dylan604 4 days ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		There's one of those Taboola type ads going around with a similar image that suggests it is a close up of belly fat. Given the source and their propensity for using images unrelated to topic, so not sure if that's what it really is.
	▲	atahanacar 3 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Inside of a stomach basically. A polypoid lesion, which I can't tell apart the exact diagnosis but the filename suggests is a neuroendocrine tumor.

▲

queuebert 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Tiny cameras will always be limited in aperture, so low light and depth of field will be a challenge.

▲

card_zero 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I wonder how they took pictures with four different cameras from the exact same position at the exact same point in time. Maybe the chameleon was staying very still, and maybe the flowers were indoors and that's why they didn't move in the breeze, and they used a special rock-solid mount that kept all three cameras perfectly aligned with microscopic precision. Or maybe these aren't genuine demonstrations, just mock-ups, and they didn't even really have a chameleon.

▲

derefr 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

They didn't really have a chameleon. See "Experimental setup" in the linked paper [emphasis mine]:

> After fabrication of the meta-optic, we account for fabrication error by performing a PSF calibration step. This is accomplished by using an optical relay system to image a pinhole illuminated by fiber-coupled LEDs. We then conduct imaging experiments by replacing the pinhole with an OLED monitor. The OLED monitor is used to display images that will be captured by our nano-optic imager.

But shooting a real chameleon is irrelevant to what they're trying to demonstrate here.

At the scales they're working at here ("nano-optics"), there's no travel distance for chromatic distortion to take place within the lens. Therefore, whether they're shooting a 3D scene (a chameleon) or a 2D scene (an OLED monitor showing a picture of a chameleon), the light that makes it through their tiny lens to hit the sensor is going to be the same.

(That's the intuitive explanation, at least; the technical explanation is a bit stranger, as the lens is sub-wavelength – and shaped into structures that act as antennae for specific light frequencies. You might say that all the lens is doing is chromatic distortion — but in a very controlled manner, "funnelling" each frequency of inbound light to a specific part of the sensor, somewhat like a MIMO antenna "funnels" each frequency-band of signal to a specific ADC+DSP. Which amounts to the same thing: this lens doesn't "see" any difference between 3D scenes and 2D images of those scenes.)

▲

gcanyon 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Given the size of their camera, you could glue it to the center of another camera’s lens with relatively insignificant effect on the larger camera’s performance.

▲

cliffy 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Camera rigs exist for this exact reason.

	▲	dylan604 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		what happens when you go too far from trusting what you see/read/hear on the internet? simple logic gets tossed out like a baby in the bathwater. now, here's the rig I'd love to see with this: take a hundred of them and position them like a bug's eye to see what could be done with that. there'd be so much overlapping coverage that 3D would be possible, yet the parallax would be so small that makes me wonder how much depth would be discernible