Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

MIT Research Amplifies Invisible Detail In Video

Soulskill posted more than 2 years ago | from the now-many-times-more-invisible-than-before dept.

Media 114

An anonymous reader writes "MIT researchers have invented an algorithm which is able to amplify motion in video that is invisible to the naked eye — such as the motion of blood pulsing through a person's face, or the breathing of an infant. The algorithm — which was invented almost by accident — could find applications in safety, medicine, surveillance, and other areas. 'The system is somewhat akin to the equalizer in a stereo sound system, which boosts some frequencies and cuts others, except that the pertinent frequency is the frequency of color changes in a sequence of video frames, not the frequency of an audio signal. The prototype of the software allows the user to specify the frequency range of interest and the degree of amplification. The software works in real time and displays both the original video and the altered version of the video, with changes magnified.'"

cancel ×

114 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Obvious application (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40415653)

Privacy-violating nudity scans.

-- Ethanol-fueled

Re:Obvious application (5, Insightful)

BitterOak (537666) | more than 2 years ago | (#40415717)

Privacy-violating nudity scans.

We already have technology for that: Backscatter X-ray and millimeter wave scanners. You can find them in most major airports.

Re:Obvious application (1)

Eponymous Hero (2090636) | more than 2 years ago | (#40416123)

whoosh

Re:Obvious application (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40416007)

Privacy-violating nudity scans.

A practical application would be using IR-inclusive video in the reported Intel cable boxes as source, and measuring the tumescent effectiveness of advertising. It could take targeted ads to a new level.

Add it to page scripts and improve the "more that we think you'll like" features with cam enabled browsers. Of course it would work best if it picked up facial expression meaning too.

It might enable entertaining features in some pseudo-medical phone/tablet apps, or help tell if you're lying when you click to agree to that license.

Re:Obvious application (1)

camperslo (704715) | more than 2 years ago | (#40416425)

I suppose with the proper tuning it could function a bit like the software that identifies sunspots, monitors them, characterizes them, and predicts flares or coronal mass ejaculations. (Maybe some of the existing solar software would work on faces/pimples? Page scripts tied to cameras could bring up ads for pimple products)

Sell bras with a jiggle-optimized damping factor? Detect beer/soda that's gone flat?

Re:Obvious application (1)

Talderas (1212466) | more than 2 years ago | (#40416107)

And here I was thinking that we finally had the technology to detect the undead that walk among us. Foolish me, of course this would be used to violate privacy.

Re:Obvious application (2)

nschubach (922175) | more than 2 years ago | (#40416277)

What if the undead wanted their privacy hidden? Maybe they don't want everyone screaming and yelling when they enter a room and just want to unlive normal lives?

Re:Obvious application (2)

Mindcontrolled (1388007) | more than 2 years ago | (#40416259)

So, to review the thread on a quite amazing algorithm, so far we have: privacy-violating nudity scans, application of any video feed as lie detector, government surveillance, yadda, yadda, yadda.

Slashdot. News For Paranoids. Comments that don't matter.

Re:Obvious application (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40417403)

You're a gay fucking nigger faggut

Re:Obvious application (3, Insightful)

interkin3tic (1469267) | more than 2 years ago | (#40419145)

I've found that cynical comments in general get modded higher than more optimistic ones. The assumption seems to be made that if you're saying something bad about something, you know what you're talking about and appear wise. Someone praising something on the other hand, that's either a shill or a naive person. I guess pessimism is contagious.

Uh, and that's dumb and we're probably all going to die somehow as a direct result of that pessimism...

Useful for creepy movies? (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40415701)

Wish youtube wasn't blocked at work.

Although, if this looks like what I think it looks like, I could see this having a lot of potential in the movie industry as well. Specifically enhancing things otherwise unnoticed could make for some very creepy footage.

Life imitating art (2)

Overzeetop (214511) | more than 2 years ago | (#40415787)

No, that creepy footage in films is what FX departments are for - and they do it far more artistically.

This is bringing all the creepy remote monitoring shit to your local and federal law enforcement departments, along with every other eye-in-the-sky system in use by government and industry.

Re:Life imitating art (1)

davester666 (731373) | more than 2 years ago | (#40418847)

Finally, a simple way to detect the vampires walking around among us.

Enhance! (4, Funny)

Bill Hayden (649193) | more than 2 years ago | (#40415729)

n/t

Uncrop! (4, Funny)

Sabriel (134364) | more than 2 years ago | (#40418643)

Red Dwarf - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUFkb0d1kbU [youtube.com]

I mean, if you're going to break the laws of physics, might as well go for broke. :)

Everything (5, Insightful)

Sparticus789 (2625955) | more than 2 years ago | (#40415741)

Now every recording device has the potential to become a lie detector.

Re:Everything (1)

Moheeheeko (1682914) | more than 2 years ago | (#40416079)

Or very good at sniffing out those Terminators.

Re:Everything (1)

nomel (244635) | more than 2 years ago | (#40417051)

They'll just implement a "random wobble" algorithm after the first is found.

Lie Detectors (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40417769)

So...when can we use this reviewing video of presidential debates?

Re:Everything (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40417969)

More than that, blush or have a heart beat increase even slightly when someone you likes walks by? This software will make it easily detectable. Coming to every high school near you.

Is that person walking alone who looks calm really afraid (fast heat beat)? Yes, lets mug him as he but up much of a fight. Trying to detect undercover cops? Want to see how tired your favorite athlete might be getting? Sure it's not perfect as a lie detector, but when did that ever matter. There are tons of things this could be used for. Here's hoping it won't get patented.

FINALLY CSI! (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40415747)

I've been waiting for the day when the CSI photo enlargement will finally stop being completely impossible!

FOCUS THERE
ENLARGE
FOCUS THERE
ENLARGE AGAIN
AGAIN
AGAIN
AGAIN
THAT ROLEX IS FAKE... HE KILLED HER!

Re:FINALLY CSI! (1)

theshowmecanuck (703852) | more than 2 years ago | (#40418081)

Obligatory:

Enhance 224176
Enhance, Stop
Move in, Stop
Pull out, Track right, Stop
Center in, Pull back, Stop
Track 45 right, Stop
Center and Stop
Enhance 34 to 36
Pan right and pull back, Stop
Enhance 34 to 46
Pull back, Wait a minute, Go right, Stop
Enhance 5719
Track 45 left, Stop
Enhance 15 to 23
Give me a hard copy right there.


Saw it when it first came out. Then talked my buddies into seeing it at the IMAX (at the first IMAX ever, called the "Cinesphere" [wikipedia.org] in Toronto) when it played there a couple of months later. Way back when we used to smoke. There weren't many movies like that before, if any. Freaked them out big time. In a good way. And it just gets better with age. I can't believe fucking ET won for best special effects that year. When you look at it today, it looks like the hokey fucking puppet it was.

Cool for Interviewers, Card Players (5, Insightful)

mooboy (191903) | more than 2 years ago | (#40415753)

For employers, or even police: you could easily detect emotional flushes in someone's face when asked certain questions, i.e., a lie detector of sorts. Also, think poker players with this software built into their "Google Glasses".

Re:Cool for Interviewers, Card Players (2)

Anubis IV (1279820) | more than 2 years ago | (#40415837)

Yeah, I was thinking that something like this could be applied rather easily to monitor breathing and heart rates for lie detection purposes. Though I hate to admit I saw it, in the movie Salt, they had a lie detector that didn't require anything hooked up to the user. It'd be neat if that technology could be real.

The applications for poker are an interesting idea as well. Awesome thinking with that one. I could definitely see this sort of thing becoming part of quite a few augmented reality applications.

Re:Cool for Interviewers, Card Players (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40416129)

I, for one, would love to see a poker tournament where all of this stuff was legal. It would have to take place on a separate circuit, but currently the top strategies are 'don't act emotional and wear dark sunglasses'. This would take things to the next level, so you might as well throw in real-time simulation outputs, probabilities, heart-rate monitors, histograms, etc, all available to each player in real time. Put a thin layer of lead paint on the backing of each card and you're good to go.

Re:Cool for Interviewers, Card Players (1)

mattack2 (1165421) | more than 2 years ago | (#40417649)

I can't remember which one, but I swear some poker tournaments on TV had heart-rate monitors on the players.. only visible to the viewers, of course.

Re:Cool for Interviewers, Card Players (1)

TheRealMindChild (743925) | more than 2 years ago | (#40417903)

I've been saying this about professional wrestling for years. Let them `roid up and actually beat the shit out of one another. The same would work for NASCAR or similar. Let them strap rocket boosters and time shifters to the bastards and bask in the entertainment.

Re:Cool for Interviewers, Card Players (1)

doesnothingwell (945891) | more than 2 years ago | (#40418757)

Want to hide your excitement? Get beta blockers, they're your little sniper friendly pals.

Re:Cool for Interviewers, Card Players (1)

Khyber (864651) | more than 2 years ago | (#40416457)

You think lie detectors are worth half a shit....

I pity you and your fantasy world.

Re:Cool for Interviewers, Card Players (2)

Anubis IV (1279820) | more than 2 years ago | (#40416851)

I already know they are. From firsthand experience.

Are they perfect? No. Can they be circumvented? Certainly. Should they be admissible in court? No. Are they still useful tools? Absolutely.

And I pity someone who feels the need to take time out of their day to post the response you did, rather than just keeping it to themselves.

Re:Cool for Interviewers, Card Players (1)

TheRealMindChild (743925) | more than 2 years ago | (#40417917)

A perfect example: Jimmy Kimmel used a fake lie detector on a child [youtube.com]

The results are predictable, but exactly what the parent is talking about

Re:Cool for Interviewers, Card Players (1)

ArsenneLupin (766289) | more than 2 years ago | (#40419885)

The truth fairy is hot...

Re:Cool for Interviewers, Card Players (1)

nospam007 (722110) | more than 2 years ago | (#40417379)

"Yeah, I was thinking that something like this could be applied rather easily to monitor breathing and heart rates for lie detection purposes"

I'd prefer if they directed their energy to finally do a sports watch that could read a precise pulse without that darn breast-thingie.

Re:Cool for Interviewers, Card Players (1)

catmistake (814204) | more than 2 years ago | (#40419409)

Yeah, I was thinking that something like this could be applied rather easily to monitor breathing and heart rates ...

There are iPhone apps that relatively accurately detect heart rate... Cardiograph [apple.com] is one that seems to work well as an pulse oximeter, [wikipedia.org] ... and I was about to try to explain what that was... those things that check heart rate with a sensor on your finger ... I read the wiki article... don't ask me how it works... something about arterial globins.

Re:Cool for Interviewers, Card Players (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40416147)

Forget that.

This technology will be immensely useful for various emergency situations:

1. Detecting aliens that have taken on human form.
2. Detecting assassination robots attempting to infiltrate our ranks.

I'm sure there's many more USEFUL applications than I haven't come up with yet. But you get the point!

"lie detector". hah.

Re:Cool for Interviewers, Card Players (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40416303)

Or Voight Kampff test...

Re:Cool for Interviewers, Card Players (1)

TheRealMindChild (743925) | more than 2 years ago | (#40417893)

I also can fake such a reaction by thinking of my mother trying to go down on me. This may seem like a troll, but it is fact

Re:Cool for Interviewers, Card Players (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40418567)

You already can, all you need is some near-IR filters and a bare (unfiltered) CCD camera. It's basically the video equivalent of one of those blood oxygenation clips you stick over the patient's finger.

-JS

Re:Cool for Interviewers, Card Players (1)

drooling-dog (189103) | more than 2 years ago | (#40418593)

Haven't looked at it in detail so I'm just guessing what they're doing here, but it's likely that this would only work well for periodic motion. In fact, the examples in their video are just that: pumping blood, breathing, guitar strings vibrating, etc. Of course, you can make anything periodic by essentially playing it in a loop, with a good windowing function...

CSI (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40415777)

Oh my god! CSI is becoming believable!

Will be used for porn (2)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 2 years ago | (#40415789)

Here's iCarly.

Here's iCarly enhanced..... you can see right through their shirts! (Watch; you'll see.)

Re:Will be used for porn (1)

dgatwood (11270) | more than 2 years ago | (#40415875)

Here's twenty years to life.

Re:Will be used for porn (0)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 2 years ago | (#40415913)

Nude images/videos are legal in the U.S. regardless of age. (Besides I thought they were all 18 now?)

Re:Will be used for porn (1)

dgatwood (11270) | more than 2 years ago | (#40416011)

*shrugs* They probably are by now. Still, snarky comments aren't meant to be precisely correct. That misses the whole point of the snark.

Re:Will be used for porn (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40415923)

That's... terrifying.

Suddenly, any pictures with persons under the age of 18 which this algorithm could be used in that fashion could then theoretically be construed as 'child pornography'.

Oh, you have a video of your kids playing in the yard? Book 'im!

Re:Will be used for porn (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40416001)

Wouldn't work. Clothing is more effective at concealing whats beneath it than skin.

Even disregarding that, the 'interesting' chromatic shifts you're looking for are all relatively static, which this technique wouldn't help with.

Besides, there are already lots of people who mess with the color levels to 'see what's under'.

Re:Will be used for porn (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40416873)

Of course if you take off the IR filter from the camera (what they do in "night-vision" mode), many clothes item are decidedly less effective at concealing whats beneath it... Combining these two feature... That might net you some time behind bars...

Re:Will be used for porn (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40417061)

What are you talking about? Did you read or watch any of TFA?

Phillip K. Dick is a genius (1)

A10Mechanic (1056868) | more than 2 years ago | (#40415803)

If this won't detect replicants, then I don't want it

Oh fuck no! (1, Informative)

Alex Belits (437) | more than 2 years ago | (#40415819)

could find applications in safety, medicine, surveillance, and other areas.

So instead of highlighting areas where something worth looking at is detected, this thing produces a highly distorted, exaggerated version of the motion, adding its own bias based on naive attribution of moving areas to distinct objects? Then a human won't see important details behind things that software deemed worthy of emphasizing -- you can just as well remove the humans from the process completely.

Re:Oh fuck no! (1)

gblackwo (1087063) | more than 2 years ago | (#40415881)

I understood the point was to be able to have humanless monitoring. The laplace calculations implied that the computer would be very aware if there was a visible frequency that was in the range of a human breathing, or heart rate. If this visible frequency disappeared, then either the subject obstructed itself from the camera, or the motion stopped. This could then set off an alarm- if motion didn't continue within a short time frame.

Re:Oh fuck no! (1)

Alex Belits (437) | more than 2 years ago | (#40417101)

If it was about finding the motions, there would be no attempts to produce a human-viewable video, it would just detect the motions and produce structured response -- "this looks like breathing", "swing set is wobbling", etc. The video output is clearly intended for human post-processing, but while it may be useful for research -- to check if movement detection indeed detected the right kind of movement -- it's unusable for human post-processing.

It's like removing a security camera, placing an artist in its place, ask him to make a pencil sketch of the area every minute, and send those sketches to the people who are supposed to monitor the camera. Except, artist is five years old and has no understanding how perspective works, or what is the shape of the objects he sees.

Re:Oh fuck no! (1)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 2 years ago | (#40415991)

No, humans decide what portion of the signal to manipulate, although I suppose an AI could be taught to look for various things that might not be obvious to humans. But your concern is exactly the same problem you have with any imaging technique - it always looks at some subset of 'reality' and interpretation is needed to correlate the signal / video / whatever.

Re:Oh fuck no! (1)

Alex Belits (437) | more than 2 years ago | (#40417059)

No.

All other techniques have DIFFERENT SEMANTICS of the input and output -- at the input the raw video feed that contains only what was seen by the camera, at the output there are two clearly separate layers -- video and highlited/marked up/colored/schematically displayed/... areas where movement (any, or of some particular kind) was detected. Human sees schematically marked up areas and positions, and tries to determine what exactly is happening by looking into the details of the original video in and around them.

What this thing does, is simulating THE SAME real-life video -- detected movements are used to produce completely fake "drawings" of moving objects that are cleverly disguised as parts of the "real" image. Then human is supposed to process the output as if it is the original video, and "see" the detected movement, however the only details that human will be able to see are those recognized by this algorithm -- everything else will be distorted or, more likely, covered up by the edges of mis-detected "objects".

It's great for tricks and movie effects, things where amplified bias toward something spectacular is the goal, however in all stated applications the goal is to find all relevant things that are hidden in the input, not produce a spectacular view of the most prominent thing at the expense of everything else.

Re:Oh fuck no! (3, Insightful)

wonkey_monkey (2592601) | more than 2 years ago | (#40416037)

Yes, clearly the demonstrated ability to remotely monitor a sleeping baby's pulse and breathing will have no practical use.

adding its own bias based on naive attribution of moving areas to distinct objects? Then a human won't see important details behind things that software deemed worthy of emphasizing

This isn't AI. It's actually fairly simple image processing. It has no bias or sense or worth. Yes, it can be tuned - by a human operator who will most likely know what they want to have their attention drawn to. How important are a few pixels in the background behind a barely breathing body when you're searching for a hypothermia victim?

If the concerns you raise had any impact on a particular scenario, the operator can just use their own eyes or switch off the processing.

Re:Oh fuck no! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40416805)

Yes, clearly the demonstrated ability to remotely monitor a sleeping baby's pulse and breathing will have no practical use.

Looks impractical to me. Consider the alternative. A clip on diode and LED that monitors pulse and blood oxygen levels and costs next to nothing. Perfectly reliable unless it falls off, but the camera isn't going to get a good angle when the baby turns anyway. This isn't a solution for an existing problem. It's a technology looking for a use. Anyway, those videos aren't automated. The baby outline was hand edited. Also it takes lots of computer power. Keep it simple. The solution already exists and works better.

Re:Oh fuck no! (1)

Alex Belits (437) | more than 2 years ago | (#40417113)

If the concerns you raise had any impact on a particular scenario, the operator can just use their own eyes or switch off the processing.

How would he know to do that? There is no indication what is exaggerated/emphasized and what is not.

Re:Oh fuck no! (1)

wonkey_monkey (2592601) | more than 2 years ago | (#40419601)

I'm sure even I could add a function to stamp a little "image processing on" subtitle to the image. That's if the psychadelic cycling colours didn't give it away. This is research. The little niceties can get left aside until it's ready to roll it out, or after user feedback.

Re:Oh fuck no! (1)

Alex Belits (437) | more than 2 years ago | (#40417229)

This isn't AI. It's actually fairly simple image processing.

Oh yes, it is! Once you introduced contours detection or image partitioning, you are have decision-making embedded in the process -- that's out of filtering and into AI territory.

Re:Oh fuck no! (1)

Alex Belits (437) | more than 2 years ago | (#40417247)

you are have decision-making embedded in the process

s/are //

(incomplete editing on my part)

Re:Oh fuck no! (1)

pclminion (145572) | more than 2 years ago | (#40417741)

Oh yes, it is! Once you introduced contours detection or image partitioning, you are have decision-making embedded in the process -- that's out of filtering and into AI territory.

So any computer program that has an if-statement in it, is artificial intelligence. Ok, glad we got that cleared up.

Re:Oh fuck no! (1)

Alex Belits (437) | more than 2 years ago | (#40417951)

So any computer program that has an if-statement in it, is artificial intelligence. Ok, glad we got that cleared up.

In a signal processing algorithm (what this thing presented as) -- yes.

Re:Oh fuck no! (1)

wonkey_monkey (2592601) | more than 2 years ago | (#40419587)

Admittedly I don't know how the details of the algorithm, but would you also call edge detection AI?

MPEG (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40415855)

Am seriously doubting that this can be accomplished on any reasonably-compressed video stream, such as is common for CCTV/security recordings.

Worst Case (3, Interesting)

TubeSteak (669689) | more than 2 years ago | (#40415935)

to long-range-surveillance systems that magnify subtle motions, to contactless lie detection based on pulse rate.

This is the first thing they're going to do with it.
All the other applications might come afterwards.

Invented? (1)

Exrio (2646817) | more than 2 years ago | (#40415945)

Uhm... I didn't RTFA or watch the video (good /.er and Flash disabled, respectively), but that sounds like an off-the-shelf bunch of audio effects pointed to a different array. Even TFS acknowledges this. "Applied to something no one else has" maybe, but hardly "invented". Really this is obvious stuff, but my guess is that everyone else just assumed a typical camera/video didn't have enough SNR for anything interesting to be amplifiable. I know I did when I had the idea of applying my audio filters to video a while ago (which consequently I never did).

Re:Invented? (5, Informative)

Bill Dimm (463823) | more than 2 years ago | (#40415997)

I didn't RTFA or watch the video (good /.er and Flash disabled, respectively)

If you click through to the article they have HTML5 videos served from YouTube there, so there is no need for Flash. Why Slashdot is still embedding videos as Flash is a mystery to me.

Re:Invented? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40417233)

Well, it's a little more than just "an audio amplifier, except for video". For instance, what exactly does it mean to amplify motion in a video? They do a pretty good job of not having the whole thing blow up into some pixellated mess.

Re:Invented? (1)

Exrio (2646817) | more than 2 years ago | (#40417337)

For the early version: Bandpass hue and saturation signals, then gain, then mix. For the later version: Track values in the spatial domain with subsample accuracy (subsample accuracy widely used in audio for delays and metering), make differential signal out of that tracking, bandpass that signal, amplify, apply as distortion to the original signal (a simple audio dynamics processor essentially does all of that, except in the amplitude domain rather than the spatial domain). Yes, there's more to this than "audio amplifier, except for video". Then again, there's more to audio than amplifiers. :-)

Replicants beware! (2)

dd1968 (1174479) | more than 2 years ago | (#40415951)

Sounds like an essential component for a Voight-Kampff machine.

Old (2, Insightful)

DarwinSurvivor (1752106) | more than 2 years ago | (#40415993)

Good lord, hack-a-day featured this over 2 1/2 weeks ago [hackaday.com] . In fact, there's already a bloody iPhone app [apple.com] !

older than that (1)

SuperBanana (662181) | more than 2 years ago | (#40416233)

I've had an Android app for at least 6 months which can detect heartbeat rates from a person's face.

I'm not sure what MIT "invented" here.

Re:older than that (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40416437)

I've had an Android app for at least 6 months which can detect heartbeat rates from a person's face.

I'm not sure what MIT "invented" here.

In the second link you can see that the original approach was presented at SIGGRAPH2005, not SIGGRAPH6MonthsAgo. The new work is an improvement.

Re:older than that (2)

FrootLoops (1817694) | more than 2 years ago | (#40416449)

I think the novelty is in a new motion tracking technique. The video starts with color change tracking (probably because it's so dramatic) but switches to motion about halfway through. The MIT news report closes with a UC Berkeley professor's comments:

"This approach is both simpler and allows you to see some things that you couldn't see with that old approach," Agrawala says. "The simplicity of the approach makes it something that has the possibility for application in a number of places. I think we'll see a lot of people implementing it because it's fairly straightforward."

Re:Old (3, Insightful)

bill_mcgonigle (4333) | more than 2 years ago | (#40416821)

I'm unclear - are you suggesting that Slashdotters should all be reading Hack-A-Day, know the Apple App Store inside and out, or that the information is time-sensitive enough to not be worth posting today?

Re:Old (4, Informative)

catmistake (814204) | more than 2 years ago | (#40419451)

In fact, there's already a bloody iPhone app [apple.com] !

For the love of Pete!! Pulse oximetry [wikipedia.org] is not the same thing! Will ignorance ever tire of dismissively posting wildly inaccurate information to slashdot summaries??!!

First Aid (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40416013)

This could be very helpful in the first aid/cpr world. Heart Attack? I've got an app for that.

Fun with analogies! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40416031)

This technology works simularly to the cookie mosnter eye filter, as it selects only the frequency of the most crumbly of cookies, rejecting those that would fail to shower him with crumbs, except that the pertinent frequency is the frequency of color changes in a sequence of video frames, not the frequency of crumbly cookies for rapid injestion.

Re:Fun with analogies! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40416145)

Perhaps I've overlooked it; where's the motorcar in your analogy?

2005 (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40416039)

Anyone else notice the Motion Magnification page was last edited September 12th 2005?

Re:2005 (1)

Chrutil (732561) | more than 2 years ago | (#40416807)

Yeah, I actually saw this presentation at Siggraph back in '05 and it was really cool. When I saw this one I was wondering if they came up with something new, but it looks like exactly the same thing.

Baywatch Beach Running (0)

loneDreamer (1502073) | more than 2 years ago | (#40416137)

Could somebody please run it on this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lAQQWpFN8I [youtube.com]

Re:Baywatch Beach Running (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40416323)

There's a reason you're lone and a dreamer.

Re:Baywatch Beach Running (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40416339)

I did.

It's a pair of bouncing balloons. Except for Hasselhoff's which has a plastic platter and a brillo pad.

When I read the title I thought: Prior art (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40416473)

The guys at CSI did this ages ago. Their amazing image enhancement algorithms are not only able to recreate detail of several orders of magnitude higher than that in the original picture but also includes advanced ray-tracing technology to be able to analyze reflections from reflections from refraction from diffusion repeated thrice and still be able to see the shape of a suspect's nose hairs.

Long range concealed gun detector (1)

Animats (122034) | more than 2 years ago | (#40416501)

This might be useful for detecting people carrying concealed guns. It's known that when people wearing a big dense object step up or down (a curb is sufficient) there's motion that can be noticed. Some cops are trained for this. Now it can be automated.

Re:Long range concealed gun detector (1)

Em Adespoton (792954) | more than 2 years ago | (#40416767)

Great... with automation, non-trained security will be able to tell that my phone or sunglasses are actually a concealed weapon... while not noticing the sheath knife the guy next to me is wearing.

I think detecting heart and respiratory rate would be much more useful -- assuming it doesn't take too much calibration, does not require the subject to be stationary, and can be used to sample a mass of people instead of a single sample.

Re:Long range concealed gun detector (1)

bruce_the_loon (856617) | more than 2 years ago | (#40419567)

Dude, if your sunglasses or cell phone weigh as much as a handgun, I'd suggest ditching the 1990 phone and not buying the depleted uranium shades again.

Re:Long range concealed gun detector (1)

mr1911 (1942298) | more than 2 years ago | (#40416829)

This might be useful for detecting people carrying concealed guns.

Why do you care? Not everyone carrying a concealed firearm has any intent to harm you. In fact, most do not.

Hoplophobia can be cured, but the first step is admitting you have a problem.

mod Up (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40416623)

Corporations spot when done for this iS consistent

I can't really see what's new about it. (0)

88NoSoup4U88 (721233) | more than 2 years ago | (#40416749)

There are already a few iPhone apps out there that do this: You put your finger over the lens, the flash-LED-light goes on, and then it takes your heart rate in under ten seconds. They also do this by measuring color differentations.
So I don't really get what's new about this.

Btw, the app is called 'Heart Rate' (www.instantheartrate.com) Damn, I feel like the MyPCAntiVirus-dude now...

SIDS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40416927)

Totally off-topic, but as a parent of an infant, the video of a baby breathing while laying on its stomach in a crib with blankets makes me freak out. Given the size of the baby, laying on its stomach is not such a big deal, because it probably rolls all over the place anyway. The blankets, however, are inexcusable.

The good news is that if the baby does suffocate, this technology will let you play back a video and so you can see the exact moment the baby died.

I knew I saw this before (2)

slew (2918) | more than 2 years ago | (#40416937)

I knew I saw this stuff before... Siggraph 2005 http://people.csail.mit.edu/celiu/motionmag/motionmag.html [mit.edu]

Re:I knew I saw this before (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40417325)

They mention in the video that these new ideas are based on the research you just linked.

Re:I knew I saw this before (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40418359)

This needs to be scored higher. This was also done with cochlear studies: http://www.oto-hns.northwestern.edu/Auditory%20Research%20Laboratory/results-mechanical.html

"The resulting Lissajous figures give the 80 times magnified displacement between the images."

Link to new work (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40417063)

The linked project is a related SIGGRAPH 2005 project. The new 2009 project can be found at: http://people.csail.mit.edu/mrub/vidmag/

Does it work in real time? (1)

cstacy (534252) | more than 2 years ago | (#40417159)

Is this to be an empathy test? Capillary dilation of the so-called blush response? Fluctuation of the pupil. Involuntary dilation of the iris?

Good grief (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40417761)

This invention will make my mom believe the house is collapsing, when I'm just wanking in the basement.

Please, do the following... (1)

nherm (889807) | more than 2 years ago | (#40418543)

1) Implement algorithm.

2) Set this video [youtube.com] as input.

3) If you see any kind of motion before 0:07, then prepare to receive Nobel prize. Does the detected motion occur before the dog runs away? (Also: Profit!)

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>