Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Seeing Around Corners With Dual Photography

Posted by timothy on Tue May 10, 2005 07:12 AM
from the expand-e6-expand-expand dept.
An anonymous reader writes "This project (which is part of this year's SIGGRAPH) has absolutely blown my mind. Basically they photograph an object with the photosensor at one point, and the light projector at another, and use the Helmholtz reciprocity algorithm to virtually switch the locations of the camera and projector, showing exactly what the light source "sees"! If that doesn't make sense to you, check out the research page and make sure to watch the 60MB video at the bottom. The playing card trick will leave you speechless!"
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • by REBloomfield (550182) <rebloomfield@gmail.com> on Tuesday May 10 2005, @07:14AM (#12487085)
    make sure to watch the 60MB video at the bottom. The playing card trick will leave you speechless!"

    The exploding server one has already rendered me speechless. Why in the name of god do they do it!

  • by nmg196 (184961) * on Tuesday May 10 2005, @07:15AM (#12487089)
    ..it would be much easier.
      • by Technician (215283) on Tuesday May 10 2005, @08:25AM (#12487652)
        With this technique, 'any' light source can function as a point of view.

        No it can't. The light source must scan the target, not just illuminate it.

        The only place I know of with a scanning light source that might be exploited is the confrence room. A photodetector would able to get a raster image of the Power Point presentation in the room and the presenter when he walked in front of the screen and became a scanned object.
        • how about a dark room with a tv or CRT monitor on? could a simple light sensor (maybe the remote control sensor? or would it not work with IR?)allow a tv to function as a camera? hello george orwell!
        • by famebait (450028) on Tuesday May 10 2005, @09:08AM (#12488060)
          Which gets me wondering: say you can see in someone's window, but the view is not very interesting: you only see a section of wall; everything else in the room is out of view. But: there is a CRT TV on in that room, and you can see its reflected light on the wall.

          How much information can you gather from that reflected light?

          You could of course recinstruct the image on the CRT, but that's not very interesting.
          The TV does not scan a focused image on its surroundings like the projector does, so you couldn't get a TVs-eye view of the room witht eh same technique.

          OTOH, it is clear that from sampling even just a single point on the wall, you could get a silhouette of anything occlusion over the screen seen from that point. At least provided you had a pure white image on the CRT, OR knew what image was on and could calibrate for it.

          How far could you get with all the information escaping the window in your direction?
          • How far could you get with all the information escaping the window in your direction?

            It's called optical tempest. With a high enough sampling rate you can reconstruct what is being shown on the monitor/TV. Each pixel as it illuminates causes a brief spike in the ambient brightness; by measuring this spike one can reconstruct the pixels being shown. After that, it's pretty simple to find the horizontal and vertical retraces.

            more info [slashdot.org]
        • Only if it is a CRT projector, which are increasingly rare.
      • by kevin@ank.com (87560) * on Tuesday May 10 2005, @09:54AM (#12488500) Homepage
        Rather than dual photography I would be more inclined to describe the method as real-world ray tracing. A focused pixel of light is captured for each pixel of the light source, then the scene is transformed so that the camera image is in the plane of the light source and the lighting function discovered earlier is inverted.

        The article claims that there is no need to describe the geometry of the scene, and I understand why that is true for the structure of the subject, but it seems as though the geometry of the light and camera would still have to be known. Anything that isn't in view of the camera in the first image is unlit in the second image, and vice versa, but I don't understand how you would determine what transformation would result in that exchange without any information on the camera-light geometry in relation to the scene.
    • by Vo0k (760020) on Tuesday May 10 2005, @07:41AM (#12487286) Journal
      Because then Mirrordot would mirror Slashdot, including link to mirrordot mirror of slashdot including...
      Kaboom, Slashdot and Mirrordot slashdotted each other!
    • Well, I've begun the download for this video, and seeing as how mirrordot is being slashdotted, I have only downloaded about 20 megs out of the 60 meg file, with an ETA of about 25 minutes. At any rate, I've put the mirror up linking to the file that's being created -- and in 25 minutes that file will be complete, until then it'll be some percentage of the total.

      Enjoy. [virginia.edu]
    • Even mirrordot got crushed... Seriously, what was the submiter thinking? Not to mention the editors.

      The real question is why nobody made a torrent of this video before the story went live. Bittorrent is one of the posterchildren of open source and legit p2p, it's unfortunate that here on Slashdot, the center of the community, nobody ever bothers to use it for it's intended purpose. We have an opportunity to put a great FOSS project to a vitally needed user, but instead they choose to continue crushing
      • I'm wondering if there isn't some way to semi-automate the torrenting process.

        I don't see any reason a torrent client can't be set up to allow a HTTP seed in addition to all the torrent peers and seeds. Granted it's going to get very poor speed, but as soon as a chunk makes it out into the swarm it should disperse to everyone fairly rapidly, and the more automated it is, the sooner there will be other seeds to take over.

        You would still need a database somewhere to provide a URL to torrent mapping, but per
    • by j-beda (85386) on Tuesday May 10 2005, @10:22AM (#12488789) Homepage
      Because it can't handle it either? Maybe this torrent [wolfheart.ro] will work?
  • Never! (Score:5, Funny)

    by beders (245558) on Tuesday May 10 2005, @07:15AM (#12487093) Homepage
    make sure to watch the 60MB video at the bottom

    I find it highly unlikely that many will manage that :0

  • rays? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by dhbiker (863466) on Tuesday May 10 2005, @07:17AM (#12487108) Homepage
    isn't this just the same in principle as ray tracing? or am I missing something
    • Re:rays? (Score:4, Informative)

      by Wyzard (110714) on Tuesday May 10 2005, @07:49AM (#12487332) Homepage

      If you mean in the sense that POV-Ray does, then no, this is very different. It's an "image-based" rendering technique, which means that you create new images using photographs and other such real-world measurements as input. Conventional ray tracing gives you pictures of models built in the computer's memory, which might approximate a real-world object.

      The important difference is that you don't have to build a computer model of the geometry you're trying to render. This is both a help because many real-world objects are hard to model accurately in a computer, and a hindrance because you can only render pictures of objects that you actually have in the real world.

  • n/t (Score:4, Funny)

    by Dacmot (266348) <dragon@nospAm.shadnet.shad.ca> on Tuesday May 10 2005, @07:17AM (#12487116)
    The playing card trick will leave you speechless!"
    ...
  • by aug24 (38229) on Tuesday May 10 2005, @07:18AM (#12487121) Homepage
    Clicky! [66.102.9.104]

    Anyone please mirror the movie?

    J.

  • ARTICLE CONTENTS (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 10 2005, @07:21AM (#12487143)
    Dual Photography

    Abstract

    We present a novel photographic technique called dual photography, which exploits Helmholtz reciprocity to interchange the lights and cameras in a scene. With a video projector providing structured illumination, reciprocity permits us to generate pictures from the viewpoint of the projector, even though no camera was present at that location. The technique is completely image-based, requiring no knowledge of scene geometry or surface properties, and by its nature automatically includes all transport paths, including shadows, interreflections and caustics. In its simplest form, the technique can be used to take photographs without a camera; we demonstrate this by capturing a photograph using a projector and a photo-resistor. If the photo-resistor is replaced by a camera, we can produce a 4D dataset that allows for relighting with 2D incident illumination. Using an array of cameras we can produce a 6D slice of the 8D reflectance field that allows for relighting with arbitrary light fields. Since an array of cameras can operate in parallel without interference, whereas an array of light sources cannot, dual photography is fundamentally a more efficient way to capture such a 6D dataset than a system based on multiple projectors and one camera. As an example, we show how dual photography can be used to capture and relight scenes.

    (a) Conventional photograph of a scene, illuminated by a projector with all its pixels turned on. (b) After measuring the light transport between the projector and the camera using structured illumination, our technique is able to synthesize a photorealistic image from the point of view of the projector. This image has the resolution of the projector and is illuminated by a light source at the position of the camera. The technique can capture subtle illumination effects such as caustics and self-shadowing. Note, for example, how the glass bottle in the primal image (a) appears as the caustic in the dual image (b) and vice-versa. Because we have determined the complete light transport between the projector and camera, it is easy to relight the dual image using a synthetic light source (c) or a light modified by a matte captured later by the same camera (d).
  • by Sir_Real (179104) on Tuesday May 10 2005, @07:23AM (#12487156)
    Seeing that R-ing the F-ing A is an impossibility for me right now, due to an inexcuseable lack of .torrent or google cache link, I'll just post some outright fabrications about it's content.

    This technology proves that there was a third gunman on the grassy knoll. This technique is like what they did in the Matrix, except "backwards." With this technology, any man can find the g-spot. When you look at the videos upside down, you can see into the past.
  • A Mirror? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Bob(TM) (104510) on Tuesday May 10 2005, @07:24AM (#12487165)
    Doesn't it seem a little funny that we need a mirror to get a look at this movie?
  • Another application (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Technician (215283) on Tuesday May 10 2005, @07:29AM (#12487192)
    With a video projector providing structured illumination, reciprocity permits us to generate pictures from the viewpoint of the projector, even though no camera was present at that location.

    Other than using electrons instead of light, that's how a scanning electron microscope works. An object is scanned (raster scan) and one or more sensors near the target pick up the reflections to generate an image. In the SEM the image appears as viewed from the scanning electron beam source.

    In the optical one mentioned in the article, the light source is a raster scanning projector which lights a target. The image is produced from photodiodes picking up reflected light.

    These two systems are very much alike. One uses photons and the other electrons. The end image is generated the same way.
  • by Alizarin Erythrosin (457981) on Tuesday May 10 2005, @07:30AM (#12487202)
    Note: I haven't read the paper yet, but it is downloading.

    It seems like this might have some military applications as a result. Imagine sticking a photo-resistor array under a door or through a window and then getting "viewpoints" from any of the lights in the room. Could aid in target aquisition and elimination.

    Not sure how well it works for something like that, but this is a rather impressive (at least to me) research project.
    • by Technician (215283) on Tuesday May 10 2005, @07:43AM (#12487299)
      It seems like this might have some military applications as a result. Imagine sticking a photo-resistor array under a door or through a window and then getting "viewpoints" from any of the lights in the room. Could aid in target aquisition and elimination.


      If you can get to the article, it mentions the light source as a projector. The projector controls the resolution. How it works is a raster scanning video projector lights objects. A photoresistor (in my opinion way too slow. A fast photodiode would be better or photomultiplier tube) picks up the reflected light from the object scanned by the light projector.

      A simple street light or the ceiling light in the room will not modulate the light to provide an image signal on a photo sensor slid under a door. On the other hand, if they were doing a video presentation, and the presenter walked between a projector and the screen and you had a photoresistor slid under the door, you would be able to see his arm movements.

      You would get the best image when the projector was not showing a slide, but showing a blank screen. Use a CRT projector, not an LCD. LCD's don't raster scan.
  • Structured light. (Score:4, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 10 2005, @07:41AM (#12487284)
    They make the point that if you illuminate an object with a projector, you can get the image with a photocell. That's because the projector scans the image with a light beam. If you know when you see the reflection, you know where the light beam was when it reflected because you have prior knowledge of the scanning pattern. That technique has been used forever. It's like the flying spot scanners that predate camera tubes.

    The 3D part is obtained when you offset the detector and the projector. If I look at a particular point on an object and scan the object with a beam of light, I can get the distance between me and the object as a function of the scanning angle.
    • Re:Structured light. (Score:5, Informative)

      by Technician (215283) on Tuesday May 10 2005, @07:59AM (#12487398)
      It's like the flying spot scanners that predate camera tubes.


      Wow, you remember those?

      For those who don't know what they are, it's simply a CRT with a blank raster and a photo detector. Usualy a photomultiplier tube (fast and before photodiodes). The flying spot was simply the bright spot on the CRT. If you put movie film in front of the CRT, the brightness detected by the photodetector was modulated by the film in-between. This was the standard way of showing movies on television in the early days. The flying spot scanner was built into a movie projector with a CRT for the lamp and a photomultiplier tube where the projection lens would go.

      In this example, it's a very big flying spot scanner. The lightsource is a projector. (raster scanning light source) The target is a 3D object instead of movie film, and the detector is offset so the 3D object casts shadows to the detector.

      The scanned image looks like it would be viewed from the light source with shadows that look like the light source is from the photo detector.
  • by tonywestonuk (261622) on Tuesday May 10 2005, @07:42AM (#12487287)
    ... a form of This technique has been done before. Take a bar code for example. A bar code could be read in 2 ways
    • {usual method} laser scans over barcode, light sensor picks up changing intensity of light, as the light is either reflected, or absorbed by the pattern.... or
    • Camera take photo of barcode in one go.

    All these people are doing, are using the first barcode technique to, take a picture of the scene. Instead of using a laser, an animation of a moving white dot is sent to the projector. The Camera, is then treated like a light sensor, for each point in the animation, the camera is queried for the brightness of the perhaps, brightest dot in it's field of view. Gradually the picture is built up, pixel by pixel, untill, finally a picture is formed in memory. This picture would be from the perspective of the projector.
  • I totally lack any scientific degrees, but this technique looks an awful lot like raytracing in reverse(or even real world application of algebra)... the projector is necessary to help map the way certain areas of the subject react to light based on the surface quality, and using pixel level illumination from the projector recreates the camera... FUCKING BRILLIANT.

    this technique works because of the lcd/dlp array in a projector, but i wonder if it can be reproduced if the light source is already a pinpoint(chrismas light, or very small bulb). what happens when the light source is very broad, like that of a computer monitor/ TV? i wonder if this technique could also be used to extrapolate what someone is watching/reading/viewing on screen? taking another stab from a raytracing perspective, i wonder if an environment could be revealed thru image analysis, aka reverse-HDRI?

    hats off to the dually photo boys of stanford and cornell... keep up the cool work.
  • Torrent (Score:5, Informative)

    by spadadot (879731) on Tuesday May 10 2005, @08:10AM (#12487504)
    Only the first part for now :

    http://dload.digitalriviera.com/DualPhotography-pa rt1.mp4.torrent [digitalriviera.com]

    Second part in 30 minutes !

    First torrent I host, I hope it's ok.
  • by UnknowingFool (672806) on Tuesday May 10 2005, @08:31AM (#12487718)
    Seeing Around Corners With Dual Photography

    Was I the only one that saw that as:
    Seeing Around Corners With Dual Pornography.

    I need more coffee.

  • by dohboy (449807) on Tuesday May 10 2005, @08:31AM (#12487720)
    Don't blame their webserver/fileserver for not being able to see the movie they raved about.

    It is the laziness and irresponsibility of the slashdot editors to not provide a bittorrent link.
    I am disgusted that slashdot raves about a site/file/mpeg then DDOSs
    it so that nobody sees it. This is particularly bad when a hobbyist site is crushed.

    Mod me into oblivion, I don't care.

  • by marat (180984) on Tuesday May 10 2005, @08:34AM (#12487738) Homepage
    1. Reverse transformation for any interesting case (note that no places are actually revealed on their example!) will always be close to singular, that means in practice that your noises (due to raster, finite precision, and just measurement error) will eat any signal in result.

    2. You should know not only amplitude, but *phase* of the source signal, that means for light that you have to use coherent light source and utilize interference on the receiver.

    1 + 2 = holography, so what is new?

    (Read the article, but still downloading the movie)
  • Another mirror... (Score:5, Informative)

    by Malcolm Scott (567157) on Tuesday May 10 2005, @08:37AM (#12487768) Homepage
    Another mirror here [retrosnub.co.uk]. No guarantees as to how long it will stay up; if it pushes me close to my monthly bandwidth limit I'll kill it...
  • Torrent file (Score:4, Informative)

    by Bisqwit (180954) <bisqwit AT iki DOT fi> on Tuesday May 10 2005, @08:50AM (#12487912) Homepage
    • Re:around corners? (Score:5, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 10 2005, @07:27AM (#12487186)
      Seeing around corners is really stretching it. You switch positions with the light source, so you can technically look at the scene from a point which is "around a corner". What they so casually mention as "structured lighting" is really the key to the whole algorithm and means that the light source shines a pattern on the scene which then allows the camera to retrace where every bit of light it sees is coming from. This means that the light source needs to be part of the scheme. You won't be able to switch yourself into the position of arbitrary lights on the street.
      • Re:around corners? (Score:5, Informative)

        by MankyD (567984) on Tuesday May 10 2005, @09:03AM (#12488024) Homepage
        Half truth:

        If you watch the video, the very last demonstration is that of them generating the image of a King (of hearts?) that was not directly visible to the camera. Rather, its face was reflected onto the page of an open book - much more complicated that just, say, a mirror. The cards reflection is not visible in the still image of the book and is only made possible through pixel scanning with the projector.

        In sum, they are seeing around a corner and are seeing something the camera could not see (directly).
        • Although several other movies and TV shows have had this "error", Blade Runner is not one of them. The picture was always intended to be a futuristic 3d hologram sort of thing; you can actually see a visual effect in some of the shots, but it's not very good, and so a lot of people just thought it was a regular photgraph.

          Bruce