Topic: "The Fulgerator"

[tijeras]

From a Wired story......I'm still digesting the possibilities of what it could be used for.

http://blog.wired.com/gadgets/2008/06/exclusive-inter.html

[Francois]

Making light graffiti at some protests or any place where photographers are to be. The image you project is only visible on the final pictures. Tons of similar tricks on Instructables.

[LT]

is it just me, or is anyone else struggling as to what this is all about?

[moominsean]

looks like a homeless guy found some camera parts...

funny to read everyone freaking out about it in the comments. who uses a flash during the day outside? and who would take a picture at of, say, the grand canyon, in the dark? people are so dumb. one idiot (sorry if he's here on the site) wrote:

"sam: that's absolutely not the point. Most people in the world have point and shoot cameras that need to use flash."

even the most basic of basic cheapo disposable POS cameras have a little charge button for the flash.

[LT]

I've re-read it and I'm still not getting it .... at best, if it works at all, a strange muddled effect might be registered, but this is probably likely to be misread as flare or something ... how on earth can he line up a shot to interfere with an unpredictable shot so exactly as to make it look like the subject is naked .... ?

[Francois]

I checked for similar technology on Instructables and this is what I came out with for light graffiti devices:

http://www.instructables.com/id/PROJECTION-BOMBING/
http://www.instructables.com/id/Laser-Image-Projector/

Though these are much more sophisticated than the guy's ray gun

[dbrooks]

I can see a limited practical application of this. As Leon has pointed out it's difficult to see how this could be used to interfere with an unpredicatable shot. However, where the subject is fixed it would be easier to focus the system on that subject.

I'm thinking in particular of a museum/art gallery where there is a no flash photography rule. The system could be set up so that anybody using flash triggers the system which renders their photograph useless (well, covered with some other message/image or whited out).

Of course, the obvious downside is that the very reason museums/galleries claim to need a no-flash rule is because of the damage flash photography causes. Using the system would make it worse because the system would also flash in response to a camera flesh - inflicting twice the damage.

However, in my view many attrations ban flash photography and tripods not because they are worried about the damage caused but because it's an effective way of ensuring that they have the monopoly on postcards, books etc. Not so much because they don't want the average visitor to take photos but because they don't want a third party coming in and taking photos which they can then sell in competition with the venue's cards/books. I can see how using this system would be an effective policing mechanism.