New Technology Could Lead To Camera Based On Human Eye

http://www.northwestern.edu/newscent...aneyecamera.ht
ml

New Technology Could Lead To Camera Based On Human Eye

EVANSTON, Ill. --- Digital cameras have transformed the world of
photography. Now new technology inspired by the human eye could push the
photographic image forward even more by producing improved images with a
wider field of view.

Yonggang Huang, Joseph Cummings Professor of Civil and Environmental
Engineering and Mechanical Engineering at Northwestern University?s
McCormick School of Engineering and Applied Science, has collaborated
with John Rogers, the Flory-Founder Chair Professor of Materials Science
and Engineering at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, to
create an array of silicon detectors and electronics that can be
conformed to a curved surface. Like the human eye, the curved surface
can then act as the focal plane array of the camera, which captures an
image.

The results of this research will be published today (Aug. 7) as the
cover story of the journal Nature.

On a normal camera, such electronics must lie on a straight surface, and
the camera?s complex system of lenses must reflect an image several
times before it can reflect on the right spots on the focal plane.

?The advantages of curved detector surface imaging have been understood
by optics designers for a long time, and by biologists for an even
longer time,? Huang says. ?That?s how the human eye works -- using the
curved surface at the back of the eye to capture an image.?

But exactly how to place those electronics on a curved surface to yield
working cameras has stumped scientists, despite many different attempts
over the last 20 years. The electronics lie on silicon wafers, which can
only be compressed 1 percent before they break and fail. Rogers and
Huang have established experimental methods and theoretical foundations,
respectively, for an effective way to transfer the electronics from a
flat surface to a curved one.

Their creation builds on the strength and innovation of both professors.
Rogers created a hemispherical transfer element made out of a thin
elastomeric membrane that can be stretched out into the shape of a flat
drumhead. In this form, planar (flat) electronics can be transferred
onto the elastomer. Popping the elastomer back into its hemispheric form
enables the transfer of the electronics onto a hemispherical device
substrate. A major challenge is that such a process applied to
conventional electronics leads to catastrophic mechanical fracture in
the brittle semiconductor materials.

Rogers and Huang got around this by creating an array of photodetectors
and circuit elements that are so small -- approximately 100 micrometers
square -- they aren?t as affected when the elastomer pops back into its
hemispheric shape. Think of them like buildings on the Earth -- though
flat buildings are built on the curved Earth, the area they take up is
so small that the curve isn?t felt.

In addition, each of these devices on the array is connected by thin
metal wires on plastic, which form arc-shaped structures that Huang and
Rogers call ?pop-up bridges.? These bridges interconnect the silicon
devices, thereby relaxing all of the strain associated with return of
the elastomer to its curved shape.

The researchers also designed the array so that the silicon component of
each device is sandwiched in the middle of two other layers, the so-
called natural mechanical plane. That way, while the top layer is
stretched and the bottom layer is compressed, the middle layer
experiences very small stress.

When tested, more than 99 percent of the devices still worked after
snapping the elastomer back to its hemispherical shape. Researchers
found that the silicon in the devices was only compressed .002 percent
-- far below the 1 percent compression where silicon fails.

Early images obtained using this curved array in an electronic eye-type
camera indicate large-scale pictures that are much clearer than those
obtained with similar, but planar, cameras, when simple imaging optics
are used.

?In a conventional, planar camera, parts of the images that fall at the
edges of the fields of view are typically not imaged well using simple
optics,? Huang says. ?The hemisphere layout of the electronic eye
eliminates this and other limitations, thereby providing improved
imaging characteristics.?

Huang and Rogers will continue to optimize the camera by adding more
pixels.

?There is a lot of room for improvement, but early tests show how well
this works. We believe that this is scalable, in a straightforward way,
to more sophisticated imaging electronics,? Huang says. ?It has been a
very good collaboration between the two groups.?

Funding was provided by the National Science Foundation and the U.S.
Department of Energy.
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0 and E3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

Fiber optic field flatteners have been around for a long time. Why not
just use a simple technology such as that?

Sure, the loosening of field curvature specs can make the lens
designer's job a little easier, but so far except at very wide FOV the
advantages have not been worth the hassle.



Alfred Molon wrote:
http://www.northwestern.edu/newscent...aneyecamera.ht
ml

New Technology Could Lead To Camera Based On Human Eye

EVANSTON, Ill. --- Digital cameras have transformed the world of
photography. Now new technology inspired by the human eye could push the
photographic image forward even more by producing improved images with a
wider field of view.

Yonggang Huang, Joseph Cummings Professor of Civil and Environmental
Engineering and Mechanical Engineering at Northwestern University?s
McCormick School of Engineering and Applied Science, has collaborated
with John Rogers, the Flory-Founder Chair Professor of Materials Science
and Engineering at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, to
create an array of silicon detectors and electronics that can be
conformed to a curved surface. Like the human eye, the curved surface
can then act as the focal plane array of the camera, which captures an
image.

The results of this research will be published today (Aug. 7) as the
cover story of the journal Nature.

On a normal camera, such electronics must lie on a straight surface, and
the camera?s complex system of lenses must reflect an image several
times before it can reflect on the right spots on the focal plane.

?The advantages of curved detector surface imaging have been understood
by optics designers for a long time, and by biologists for an even
longer time,? Huang says. ?That?s how the human eye works -- using the
curved surface at the back of the eye to capture an image.?

But exactly how to place those electronics on a curved surface to yield
working cameras has stumped scientists, despite many different attempts
over the last 20 years. The electronics lie on silicon wafers, which can
only be compressed 1 percent before they break and fail. Rogers and
Huang have established experimental methods and theoretical foundations,
respectively, for an effective way to transfer the electronics from a
flat surface to a curved one.

Their creation builds on the strength and innovation of both professors.
Rogers created a hemispherical transfer element made out of a thin
elastomeric membrane that can be stretched out into the shape of a flat
drumhead. In this form, planar (flat) electronics can be transferred
onto the elastomer. Popping the elastomer back into its hemispheric form
enables the transfer of the electronics onto a hemispherical device
substrate. A major challenge is that such a process applied to
conventional electronics leads to catastrophic mechanical fracture in
the brittle semiconductor materials.

Rogers and Huang got around this by creating an array of photodetectors
and circuit elements that are so small -- approximately 100 micrometers
square -- they aren?t as affected when the elastomer pops back into its
hemispheric shape. Think of them like buildings on the Earth -- though
flat buildings are built on the curved Earth, the area they take up is
so small that the curve isn?t felt.

In addition, each of these devices on the array is connected by thin
metal wires on plastic, which form arc-shaped structures that Huang and
Rogers call ?pop-up bridges.? These bridges interconnect the silicon
devices, thereby relaxing all of the strain associated with return of
the elastomer to its curved shape.

The researchers also designed the array so that the silicon component of
each device is sandwiched in the middle of two other layers, the so-
called natural mechanical plane. That way, while the top layer is
stretched and the bottom layer is compressed, the middle layer
experiences very small stress.

When tested, more than 99 percent of the devices still worked after
snapping the elastomer back to its hemispherical shape. Researchers
found that the silicon in the devices was only compressed .002 percent
-- far below the 1 percent compression where silicon fails.

Early images obtained using this curved array in an electronic eye-type
camera indicate large-scale pictures that are much clearer than those
obtained with similar, but planar, cameras, when simple imaging optics
are used.

?In a conventional, planar camera, parts of the images that fall at the
edges of the fields of view are typically not imaged well using simple
optics,? Huang says. ?The hemisphere layout of the electronic eye
eliminates this and other limitations, thereby providing improved
imaging characteristics.?

Huang and Rogers will continue to optimize the camera by adding more
pixels.

?There is a lot of room for improvement, but early tests show how well
this works. We believe that this is scalable, in a straightforward way,
to more sophisticated imaging electronics,? Huang says. ?It has been a
very good collaboration between the two groups.?

Funding was provided by the National Science Foundation and the U.S.
Department of Energy.

Don wrote on Fri, 22 Aug 2008 08:51:43 -0500:

Sure, the loosening of field curvature specs can make the lens
designer's job a little easier, but so far except at very wide
FOV the advantages have not been worth the hassle.

Alfred Molon wrote:
http://www.northwestern.edu/newscent...aneyecamera.ht
ml

New Technology Could Lead To Camera Based On Human Eye


I wonder if camera designers are trying hard enough? Look at the
wonderful pictures from the initially screwed up design of the Hubble
telescope.

--

James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

"Alfred Molon" wrote in message
...
http://www.northwestern.edu/newscent...aneyecamera.ht
ml


--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0 and E3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

My very first Camera, Kodak Brownie 127, held the film in a curve.

The additional Manufacturing costs in doing this with Digital, would
probably be much more than any savings on simplifying lenses.

So don't put off buying your next camera.

Roy G

Don Stauffer wrote:
Fiber optic field flatteners have been around for a long time. Why not
just use a simple technology such as that?

Sure, the loosening of field curvature specs can make the lens
designer's job a little easier, but so far except at very wide FOV the
advantages have not been worth the hassle.

I've wondered about that. It seems that approach might also involve a
larger image capture area condensed to a smaller sensor and I guess that
would mean larger lenses with small-sensor performance. The setup in
that article probably does not have very tightly packed pixels so also a
poor performer.

Alfred Molon wrote:
http://www.northwestern.edu/newscent...eyecamera.html

--
Paul Furman
www.edgehill.net
www.baynatives.com

all google groups messages filtered due to spam

Paul Furman wrote:
Don Stauffer wrote:
Fiber optic field flatteners have been around for a long time. Why
not just use a simple technology such as that?

Sure, the loosening of field curvature specs can make the lens
designer's job a little easier, but so far except at very wide FOV the
advantages have not been worth the hassle.

I've wondered about that. It seems that approach might also involve a
larger image capture area condensed to a smaller sensor and I guess that
would mean larger lenses with small-sensor performance.

Although it would give the larger format's shallow DOF which is
interesting but not for the mass market.


The setup in
that article probably does not have very tightly packed pixels so also a
poor performer.

Alfred Molon wrote:
http://www.northwestern.edu/newscent...eyecamera.html




--
Paul Furman
www.edgehill.net
www.baynatives.com

all google groups messages filtered due to spam

Paul Furman wrote:
Paul Furman wrote:
Don Stauffer wrote:
Fiber optic field flatteners have been around for a long time. Why
not just use a simple technology such as that?

Sure, the loosening of field curvature specs can make the lens
designer's job a little easier, but so far except at very wide FOV the
advantages have not been worth the hassle.
I've wondered about that. It seems that approach might also involve a
larger image capture area condensed to a smaller sensor and I guess that
would mean larger lenses with small-sensor performance.

Although it would give the larger format's shallow DOF which is
interesting but not for the mass market.


The setup in
that article probably does not have very tightly packed pixels so also a
poor performer.

Alfred Molon wrote:
http://www.northwestern.edu/newscent...eyecamera.html



Just my personal preference, but a shallow DOF is something I consider a
definite negative aspect. I don't like pictures where ANYTHING is out
of focus. I am sure that there are 'artistic' reasons for having
backgrounds less distinct, but I just don't like seeing that. More
pixels, with everything in focus would be my preference in any camera.
If 'fuzzing' of something is desired later, it can be pretty easily done
by Photoshop.

On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 04:27:01 -0500, Ron Hunter
wrote:

Paul Furman wrote:
Paul Furman wrote:
Don Stauffer wrote:
Fiber optic field flatteners have been around for a long time. Why
not just use a simple technology such as that?

Sure, the loosening of field curvature specs can make the lens
designer's job a little easier, but so far except at very wide FOV the
advantages have not been worth the hassle.
I've wondered about that. It seems that approach might also involve a
larger image capture area condensed to a smaller sensor and I guess that
would mean larger lenses with small-sensor performance.

Although it would give the larger format's shallow DOF which is
interesting but not for the mass market.


The setup in
that article probably does not have very tightly packed pixels so also a
poor performer.

Alfred Molon wrote:
http://www.northwestern.edu/newscent...eyecamera.html



Just my personal preference, but a shallow DOF is something I consider a
definite negative aspect. I don't like pictures where ANYTHING is out
of focus. I am sure that there are 'artistic' reasons for having
backgrounds less distinct, but I just don't like seeing that. More
pixels, with everything in focus would be my preference in any camera.
If 'fuzzing' of something is desired later, it can be pretty easily done
by Photoshop.


I'm on the opposite side of that fence, since most of my subjects are
birds and other wildlife. I want ONLY that subject to be in focus, if
possible. Your position is perfectly understandable if the primary
subject matter is like landscape or similar.

Olin McDaniel
To reply by email, please remove "abcd" from Return address
-----------------------------------------------------
"Ignorance is treatable, Stupidity is incurable. Sometimes
the difference is hardly distinguishable, however."

Ron Hunter wrote:

Just my personal preference, but a shallow DOF is something I consider a
definite negative aspect. I don't like pictures where ANYTHING is out
of focus. I am sure that there are 'artistic' reasons for having
backgrounds less distinct, but I just don't like seeing that. More
pixels, with everything in focus would be my preference in any camera.
If 'fuzzing' of something is desired later, it can be pretty easily done
by Photoshop.

I'm surprised at that statement Ron. Using OOF BG's (or FG's) is a
great way to isolate subjects.

Is it because you do a particular kind of photography (landscapes) most
often?

OTOH, for most of my s/w trip my MF lenses were rarely out of the f/11 -
f/22 range while my DSLR was rarely out of the f/1.8 - f/8 range... each
camera for a purpose on that trip.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.