Is this invisible camera possible?

Updated - this is a 100% hoax since the camera will be "shipped" a week form Friday - on April 1st...

This video describes "The Invisible Camera" which is a see-through plastic box with a pinhole that can completely isolate the film from the ambient light and take a correct exposure. What do you think, it this real or a hoax?

Related posts:

  1. Apple iCam concept camera

This entry was posted in Future of Photo Equipment. Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

16 Comments

  1. Posted March 21, 2011 at 11:16 am | Permalink

    About 2 minutes into the video, I checked the date to make sure it wasn’t April 1st.

    • Posted March 21, 2011 at 11:18 am | Permalink

      I say it’s fake too

      • Joe R.
        Posted March 21, 2011 at 2:15 pm | Permalink

        1/100,000 of a second @ f/128 with 0.002 ISO film.

        It’s theoretically correct. It will be completely black which gives it an infinite resolution. Exopixels soon I’m sure!

  2. MG
    Posted March 21, 2011 at 11:29 am | Permalink

    german sense of humour.

  3. Posted March 21, 2011 at 11:38 am | Permalink

    they promised a demo camera to fstoppers that will ship a week from Friday – on April 1st!
    100% hoax

  4. Nathan
    Posted March 21, 2011 at 2:01 pm | Permalink

    Wait, he just promised ISO 1/500th which would be basically COMPLETELY insensitive to light, then he promised fast shutter speed on a pinhole camera.

    What he’s saying is that the film won’t ever expose. At that sensitivity, and at that aperture, it would take WEEKS to expose an image, not thousandths of a second.

    Really, he needs sensitivities 50,000X higher in order to take minute long exposures in broad daylight.

    This doesn’t even address the fact that a camera has to be a dark box. Every single thing in this video is the opposite of a camera in every way. It fails to be funny, though.

    Terapixel? Seriously? On film? Nothing he can do will change the size of a silver oxide molecule or crystal. It’s just gobbledygook.

  5. chris
    Posted March 21, 2011 at 6:07 pm | Permalink

    seriously admin? you asked if this was real or a hoax? ^^

    • Posted March 21, 2011 at 10:41 pm | Permalink

      the video was very well made for a hoax, they even made the prototype :)

    • mog
      Posted March 22, 2011 at 11:34 am | Permalink

      @PR admin

      The prototype is just a Skink pinhole lens glued to an acrylic box. The film back is just a Fidelity Elite. They don’t even bother to hide the “Skink” lizard logo from the lens.

      I can make that in an afternoon.

      You also know its not “polorized glass” as you can clearly see where the acrylic was glued together. Acrylic adhesives are very unique in that they actually weld the different plastic together by melting it, its called ‘solvent welding’. You can see this at the edges of the ‘prototype’. Obviously this does not happen with glass, making a glass box of that size is very difficult and would look very different from what he is holding. Not to mention that ain’t polarized (glass or acrylic) either way.

  6. Posted March 21, 2011 at 8:11 pm | Permalink

    someone has way too much time on their hands…..

  7. mochapaulo
    Posted March 21, 2011 at 10:29 pm | Permalink

    haha… may not be a joke if they imply an optical camouflage coating of the camera body. Japan has already made a rain shelter which cab be wearing on the body. But of course, lens is unable to hide.

  8. Anon
    Posted March 22, 2011 at 11:03 am | Permalink

    Ahahahaha. They’re using 4×5 sheet film…what a waste.

    • Eric
      Posted March 23, 2011 at 7:50 pm | Permalink

      what ? how is it a waste, its obviously a hoax but how is using 4×5 or any other size of film a waste?

  9. Rob V
    Posted March 23, 2011 at 12:34 am | Permalink

    Reciprocity failure at such fast shutter speeds would be enormous. And the loss of resolution due to diffraction present in pinholes would make those “terapixels” of resolution useless (even if it weren’t for the physical limitations regarding molecule sizes).

  10. RainerE
    Posted March 25, 2011 at 10:04 am | Permalink

    BS

  11. Posted March 26, 2011 at 5:22 pm | Permalink

    Haha, compliments to Chris Marquardt for this great april fools :)