Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Researchers shrink camera to the size of a salt grain

engineering.princeton.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 105 posts

Re: Researchers shrink camera to the size of a salt grain

#81

Post by codingdave »

cvakang wrote: post #18
dtgriscom wrote: post #13

The article keeps saying "camera", but we only see the lens. How big is the sensor and cabling?

Yes, I had the same question. But if the lens miniaturised so does the rest. Imagine swallowing this and getting picturs of your inside of body in a smart phone.

That already exists - the term is "capsule endoscopy" if you want to find out more. But -- it is a big pill to swallow. A smaller and better camera could both make the experience better for the patient and improve results, so this is still a good step to improvements.

Re: Researchers shrink camera to the size of a salt grain

#82

Post by op00to »

derbOac wrote: post #75
boibombeiro wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The parent post used the number of papers at the top conferences in their respectives fields. It means they are unquestionably pushing the state of art fowards. Or the system is completely broken. I see your point though. This is a recurrent discussion. I think the change of paradigm was positive. Nowadays, papers are published in interactive and incremental way, instead of, doing a parallel with software engineering…

The problem isn't the incremental nature of the papers or the collaboration, it's the equating of scientist quality with numbers of publications (or something like it). By your own analogy, it would be like saying "someone is a great computer scientist" based on the number of commits they or their colleagues make. I might even argue that regardless of how the product is or is not improved by the process, the way we a…

The comment wasn’t that they had a lot of papers, but they had a lot of papers in influential conferences.

Re: Researchers shrink camera to the size of a salt grain

#83

Post by op00to »

randomsearch wrote: post #76
guerrilla wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those weren't just papers published but papers published at elite conferences. Each one must be a serious contribution.

> Each one must be a serious contribution I'm sorry to inform you that this is untrue. Elite conferences are full of work that is _scientifically_ awful and does not contribute anything to _science_.

Hello, this is the wild comment police. Please provide evidence that Elite conferences are “full of work that is scientifically awful”.

Full meaning significantly most of the work is of no value?

License, registration, and proof of your statement please.

Re: Researchers shrink camera to the size of a salt grain

#84

Post by brazzy »

cvakang wrote: post #18
dtgriscom wrote: post #13

The article keeps saying "camera", but we only see the lens. How big is the sensor and cabling?

Yes, I had the same question. But if the lens miniaturised so does the rest. Imagine swallowing this and getting picturs of your inside of body in a smart phone.

> But if the lens miniaturised so does the rest.

Not necessarily. I recently looked into miniature cameras for self- built drones.

For less than $50, you can get a package with a lens that's maybe 2-3mm across. The entire sensor+lens unit is roughly 1cm cubed. But then you need the electronics to process and store the image, and you're up to credit card size. And then you need a battery, and not a tiny one because that image processing draws quite a bit of juice.

Re: Researchers shrink camera to the size of a salt grain

#85

Post by boibombeiro »

randomsearch wrote: post #74
boibombeiro wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The parent post used the number of papers at the top conferences in their respectives fields. It means they are unquestionably pushing the state of art fowards. Or the system is completely broken. I see your point though. This is a recurrent discussion. I think the change of paradigm was positive. Nowadays, papers are published in interactive and incremental way, instead of, doing a parallel with software engineering…

> It means they are unquestionably pushing the state of art fowards. Or the system is completely broken. I agree with this statement: the system is completely broken. I've peered inside top level conferences and I can tell you that publishing there does not mean you are pushing the state of the art. Instead you may be: popular, good at playing the political game, lucky (when acceptance rates are low, luck plays a hug…

I don't think you are completly wrong.

For instance, last year there was a whole debacle at one of those top conferences because someone from nvidia, that was in the board of this conference, made (and posted on twitter!) a black list for people who said something that was not alligned with hers ideology. (I wonder what happened after the whole thing went quiet).

Yet, I do still think those conference, and their sponsors, have interest in only selecting the papers based on their content. I don't think you can get them to publish your papers so many time only with influence. Also, things like blind peer review exists to mitigate that (although, it favors writing quality over content).

Also. Politics isn't intrinsically evil. One of the great success of Einstein was spreading his idea. Argbly, others made more important achievement, yet didn't amass the same level of fame as him.

In my experience, people who are good at politics, usually persue others path. Doing so only to get publication is not the most rewarding thing for those kinda of people.

Re: Researchers shrink camera to the size of a salt grain

#86

Post by jhgb »

legostormtroopr wrote: post #31
f3rnando wrote: post #19

13 days ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29255511 ("How to grow sodium chloride crystals at home")

How is this relevant to the conversation? Did you see salt grain and assume it was a dupe?

> How is this relevant to the conversation?

Presumably in the "how large do you want the salt grain to be?" sense?

Re: Researchers shrink camera to the size of a salt grain

#87

Post by ksec »

tdrdt wrote: post #61

If you take a look at the paper it is only about the optics. Which is still a big achievement, but I think the complete system is a little bit bigger than a grain of salt. So the article should be taken with a grain of salt as well. https://light.princeton.edu/publication/neural-nano-optics/

>Neural nano-optics outperform existing state-of-the-art metasurface lens designs in broadband and it is the first meta-optic imager that achieves high-quality, wide field-of-view color imaging.

Am I correct in saying this is still a Metalens but getting Neural / ML enhanced?

Re: Researchers shrink camera to the size of a salt grain

#88

Post by alexpotato »

I remember years ago watching a show on potential future technologies and one of the people being interviewed mentioned the following:

"One day, your child will be able to go to a dollar store and buy sheet of sticker cameras. These cameras will be paper thin, can be stuck anywhere and will have their own internet address that can be accessed over the public internet from a browser. Everything I just described is technically possible now, it's just not been put together and some of the components aren't cheap enough. As a society, we should be prepared for the ramifications of this."

Research and advancements like this make the above feel like it's getting closer and closer to the above.

Re: Researchers shrink camera to the size of a salt grain

#89

Post by fallat »

anaganisk wrote: post #50
fallat wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What processing can an RFID do? AFAIK RFID can only store and send data, and are pretty "dumb".

I remember watching a docu in Netflix about spies where they show a deice that could record and transmit sound, using same technology.

It's not processing though? It's acting like a mirror or a polaroid? Do those process?...

Re: Researchers shrink camera to the size of a salt grain

#90

Post by mensetmanusman »

tdrdt wrote: post #61

If you take a look at the paper it is only about the optics. Which is still a big achievement, but I think the complete system is a little bit bigger than a grain of salt. So the article should be taken with a grain of salt as well. https://light.princeton.edu/publication/neural-nano-optics/

You could make a rice array located at various locations around a room and reconstruct an image through post processing.
Post reply on HN