Reg Hardware

Comments on: Coming soon: clothes that take photographs

Shoes 

Posted Friday 10th July 2009 12:28 GMT

Paris Hilton

How long before someone makes shoes out of this stuff?

Good for Camouflage 

Posted Friday 10th July 2009 12:37 GMT

If you combine this with the cloth that can display images, you have some primo-grade camo there.

Walking around in London 

Posted Friday 10th July 2009 12:47 GMT

Coat

So the choise is get nicked for being clothed, or going about "indecently"?

Or do only "long lenses" get arrested by paranoid officers fighting terrorism?

Mine will have to be the see through mac then

Could be the start of.. 

Posted Friday 10th July 2009 12:51 GMT

Black Helicopters

Cloaking device. Project image seen on opposite side.

Plod will love this... 

Posted Friday 10th July 2009 12:52 GMT

Coat

... Excuse me Sir, but was your jacket taking a photograph of this building which may be of use to terrorists...?

Mine's the 12MP coat...

Perfect!! 

Posted Friday 10th July 2009 13:06 GMT

Alien

Make some PJs out of the stuff and we can PROVE that aliens abduct us at night........

And... 

Posted Friday 10th July 2009 13:06 GMT

Go

...if a police officer suspects you of being a terrorist taking photos you will be required to take your clothes off!

Who is going to be the first to suggest... 

Posted Friday 10th July 2009 13:06 GMT

Paris Hilton

... getting Paris H to wear it inside-out...

very interesting 

Posted Friday 10th July 2009 13:12 GMT

Grenade

so it work on roughly the same principle as an insect eye, the fly being the typical example.

I remember a great many innacurate recreations of how the fly sees. That is, the typical camera trick of producing many hexagonal duplicates of the same image, when in actual fact each hexagonal element would have actually been an individual pixel of the same image.

I wouldn't be suprised if DARPA showed an interest in this. The potential for highly discrete cameras with built in redundancy is certainly appealing in a military and espionage content.

Of course, the electronics required to make sense of the image would be the hardest factor to disguise, both in physical dimensions, and transmissions.

Aww, where's my black helicopter? Spose the grenage will have to do

PP 

Posted Friday 10th July 2009 13:44 GMT

Paris Hilton

Paparazzi Paradise

What took so long? 

Posted Friday 10th July 2009 13:50 GMT

Coat

Taking images with cloth was done centuries ago. Or is the Turin Shroud a modern fake?

So perhaps this should be: Scientists mimic God's camera.

Mine's the one with the religious relics made out of plastic in the pocket.

New Category 

Posted Friday 10th July 2009 13:56 GMT

Thumb Up

She Shot Herselve - hot, wet beaver closeups

Re: Who is going to be the first to suggest... 

Posted Friday 10th July 2009 14:00 GMT

Thumb Up

Well, I was going to say: No more turning tha pants inside out to make them last an extra day. But at least we can have fun with bed sheets made out of this material.

@Anon Coward 

Posted Friday 10th July 2009 15:16 GMT

Happy

Oh come on - we've all seen Paris without her kit on.

But what happens... 

Posted Friday 10th July 2009 15:23 GMT

Big Brother

If they put the camera on underpants and I put the underpants on inside out.

Ewwwwwwwwww!

(Gonna need a big wide angle lense mind *Wink*)

A small problem 

Posted Friday 10th July 2009 18:37 GMT

Boffin

OK so you can make a patch of this material. But most fabrics are made of *continuous* fibres. So unless you make the fibre and *cut* each fibre to get its ends free to act as the sensor it will need to bend the fibre at each corner enough to allow light to enter.

It's the start of a neat idea.

Be Careful 

Posted Friday 10th July 2009 19:14 GMT

Not to to put it on inside out, because nobody wants to see /that/ picture.

Confused... 

Posted Saturday 11th July 2009 03:23 GMT

Coat

If a policeman using one of those backscatter x-ray imagers takes a picture of me through my camera clothes, will he arrest me as a potential terrorist because my clothes snapped him, or not, because he didn't see them in the image?

Mine's the one plugged into the video recorder...