Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Links and Resources
These Tiny, Incredible ‘Metalenses’ are the Next Giant Leap in Optics
Jun 3, 2016 21:55:56   #
St3v3M Loc: 35,000 feet
 
These Tiny, Incredible ‘Metalenses’ are the Next Giant Leap in Optics
http://petapixel.com/2016/06/03/incredible-flat-metalenses-may-future-optics

Reply
Jun 3, 2016 22:07:27   #
Whuff Loc: Marshalltown, Iowa
 
Ain't technology wonderful? I'd like to come back in a hundred years to see where it's taken us.

Walt

Reply
Jun 3, 2016 22:23:01   #
GENorkus Loc: Washington Twp, Michigan
 
With all the newer tiny things coming, something like industrial espionage will be rampant and no one know.

Reply
 
 
Jun 3, 2016 22:24:51   #
GENorkus Loc: Washington Twp, Michigan
 
Duplicate post.

Reply
Jun 4, 2016 07:43:23   #
jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY
 
St3v3M wrote:
These Tiny, Incredible ‘Metalenses’ are the Next Giant Leap in Optics
http://petapixel.com/2016/06/03/incredible-flat-metalenses-may-future-optics


I read an article about that last night - amazing!

Reply
Jun 4, 2016 09:58:27   #
rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona
 
That is pretty incredible. I wonder just how close they are to making it work on a mass production level.

This also means I have to step up my activities in making a lensless camera. My aim is to use electromagnetism to focus an image onto a photosensitive material.
--Bob


St3v3M wrote:
These Tiny, Incredible ‘Metalenses’ are the Next Giant Leap in Optics
http://petapixel.com/2016/06/03/incredible-flat-metalenses-may-future-optics

Reply
Jun 4, 2016 19:07:30   #
forjava Loc: Half Moon Bay, CA
 
Article by unnamed author sounds like it was written by a child or a high-school cheerleader, except more naive. An example of the hype phase of "crossing the chasm."

Failure of the article 1: making it sound like it will be in production for everything tomorrow morning. Technology transfer normally begins in a niche and gradually encroaches, over a decade, if not 2-3 and originators fail to see all implications. For example, the article did not say much about optical errors such as diffraction, which could be inherent in the approach. These will have to be dealt with.

Failure of the article 2: the article's low-to-zero understanding of materials and lenses, that is, of everything covered. For example, the no-scattering claim for titanium dioxide. Its refractive index depends on the deposition process and it can be hugely scattering.

Please understand, I am commenting on the article, not the research.

To illustrate the multi-decade remark I have made above, I have a patent (

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=7,340,730.PN.&OS=PN/7,340,730&RS=PN/7,340,730 .

) -- I wrote this up in 2001 and built it in 2002 before mobile went viral and of course we had not foreseen that. This patent has been cited in many patents issued up to the present, as in Patent US20120159308 - Customization of Mobile Applications ... from 2012) and I am deriving a patent portfolio inspired by the 2002 proof of concept. Significant impact is still at least five years away. All kinds of stuff gets in the way of development, not to mention production. There's your two decades, easily.

In short, keep your SLR lenses.

Reply
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Links and Resources
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.