My friend, a very big Harry Potter fan, showed me this article.
I was just wondering what you dopers thought about it. I tried to convince my friend that the picture looked wrong and if it were true, then another, larger, news source would be covering it, but she wouldn’t listen.
Thanks in advance,
Brilharma
What coat? I didn’t see any coat! Oh, that big green thing? Looks like a movie screen. Notice we didn’t see the back which I assume is visible, or at least the camera on his back is visible. Then that image is displayed on the front. Much like James Bond’s invisible car in Die Another Day.
In theory, it would work, but hiding all the micro cameras will be a pain.
Well, since it’s not an actual invisibility cloak - read the article - it seems reasonable, if ridiculously unnecessary and likely prohibitively expensive.
hrh
…now . I think it’s an awesome technology that definitely has some uses. Just 'cuz it costs $ARM.LEG now, doesn’t necessarily mean it will be as expensive in the future. More power to her!
They stole my idea!!
I’ve always wanted the walls of my house to have cameras on the outside and be made of giant screens on the inside, so that it’d look like I didn’t have any walls.
Your idea?
Ray Bradbury’s idea!
I was under the impression that this was an image-processing technique, and that the jacket was not actually displaying the scene. Kind of like the green and blue screens they use to make it look like the weatherman is standing in front of the weather map.
http://optics.org/articles/news/8/8/39/1
Here are some better sites, can’t wait until we see some more discriptive analysis though…
You people are so cynical. Can’t you just admit that invisibility cloaks are cool? Even if this is more of “transparency cloak” it is nice to see the technology headed somewhere.
That is, of course, if this isn’t a hoax…
I know that a few years ago I saw something on TV about this same type of technology. Although it was being developed by the military. Based on the same sort of idea as the linked article, I remember that when they showed someone wearing it, while you could still see then, I was impressed at the overall blending into the background that it did. I wish I could either remember the TV show, or what it was called. Lemme do some searching and see if I can find it.
Here’s an article talking about something similar.
But that’s all I can really find on it…oh well. Maybe it’s just all too super-secret 
preview is my friend, preview is my friend. Link fixed
That’s a damn good idea btw.
What about perspective and parallax changes? The view in the photo shows an image which matches up pretty well with the surroundings, but it only does so * from that angle and distance*. Think of it like a TV screen. If you walk up to it, or move around in a room, you don’t see into the picture at different angles. You only see what’s projected onto the screen, from the camera’s point of view. Unless the back of the jacket is covered with small cameras pointing in every possible direction, as you moved past the person the image would remain in the same position, and would move out of registration with the background. Plus, as you moved closer or farther from the person the same thing would happen. The imagers would have to be able to compensate for different viewers at different distances from the jacket at different heights.
IMO: Hoax.
For more info, check out: http://www.star.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp/pro...EDIA/xv/oc.html
I should have said: Hoax, or extremely limited in adjustability, so that only one perspective can be handled at a time.
Here’s a link to the page by the people who’ve been developing this concept: http://www.star.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp/projects/MEDIA/xv/oc.html
It’s not a hoax. It’s actually a pretty simple idea fundamentally. But there’re plenty of kinks to work out and it would be wildly optimistic to call it an invisibility cloak.
There’re several movies you can download to check out the effect with various objects. I would say that the cloak is actually the least effective of the examples. The one with the digitizing arm is amazing. There is also a diagram that shows how the systems works in some detail.
I thought it was intersting that they list Ghost in the Shell as a reference at the end of the page.
By the way, looking at it again, it doesn’t even match up that well. Notice the car on the left shoulder, and the bicyclist behind her.
Hoax.
I withdraw my hoax claim. It’s interesting. The problems I outlined above are still valid though.
What Enigma42 said. My link was broken.