Matrix goggles

[archerships]

Russian hackers Alexei Shulgin and Aristarkh Chernyshev show off goggles that display the world through various filters, including infrared, reverse color, and even ASCII.

Also, did you know that real “X-ray” goggles (NSFW) apparently now exist? (Assuming the website is real–it doesn’t exactly inspire confidence.). Also, the images aren’t that high in quality, and the goggles only work well with synthetic clothing. But who knows? With enhancements in image processing, all my boyhood perv fantasies could soon be made reality.

Original: craschworks - comments

Comments

[pasquin.livejournal.com]

I've noticed a randy turn to your LJ.

[crasch.livejournal.com]

Interesting. I hadn't noticed myself posting more bawdy stuff than usual.

[astroprisoner.livejournal.com]

After a very very quick look at the site, here's what I think:

• This is based on an IR feature from a Sony camera, and I thought that Sony adjusted the cameras so it didn't do this any more.


• I don't think the X-ray glasses are real.


• I think those glasses are supposed to work on some sort of fibre-optic transmission of light through the glasses frame to the Sony IR camera.

And last but not least...

• X-ray specs like they sold in the back of comic books are theoretically possible, but there are some technology hurdles to overcome.

Backscatter X-ray technology (using the Compton effect (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compton_effect)) does in fact produce an image similar to what the X-ray specs were supposed to produce: seeing through clothes to naked body parts (as opposed to seeing straight through the flesh and viewing bones), and being able to see the image without having to set up some sort of receiver (i.e. "X-ray film").

The technology exists, and is in fact in widespread use, but about the smallest you can currently make the unit is roughly the size of an airport baggage scanner (and is used, as you might deduce, as a baggage scanner). The size of the X-ray emitter is the tough nut to crack, and of course to say nothing of the issue of a power supply. It may be possible, but so far as I know no one is working on it.

As you may know from the news, there is a version of a backscatter X-ray device tuned to work with a human body and clothing, on trial run at Phoenix airport. It works through any type of clothing, not just synthetic stuff. We de-tuned the image to do a line drawing and not a nekkid body, but originally it did show some detail. Click here for a NYT story on it, including a picture of the system in use, a view of the current outline view, and down below an image from the original resolution setting. (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/24/us/24scan.html?ex=1329973200&en=630d728bdf0e4155&ei=5089&partner=rssyahoo&emc=rss) (And in case you're wondering, the woman in the color pic with her arms up? Professional model, hired in Phoenix for the photo shoot.)

So yeah, in theory, it's possible. I just don't think this is them.

[deftly.livejournal.com]

Sony did indeed adjust their cameras to get rid of the see-through effect.

[desar.livejournal.com]

I remember when Sony came out with a camera that included Nightshot option that when you put a red filter on it you could see through clothes. It was amazing how quickly that camera sold out !

[hhallahh.livejournal.com]

It's my impression that the X-Ray effect is partially a product of the image-capture technology itself but also a product of how the image is processed by the camera. For example, it's well-known that one can x-ray Photoshop through many types of clothing based on playing around with the contrasts on an image which has already been taken.