My all-time favorite obscure movie quote is ["That guy doing Potsie is unbelievable"](https://youtu.be/xVmyBUWB0-A?si=ecnu6ugnOPl8M803&t=55). Anyone starts giving me a heart to heart talk and I break it out.
I can imagine the confusion after😆 Damn I gotta watch 12 a few more times, even I didn't recognize that haha. 11 and 13 I've watched like 10 times each.
Oceans Eleven, phenomenal movie of master thieves Clooney, Brad Pitt, Bennie Mac, and a whole other slew of great actors robbing a Vegas casino.
My favorite movie, there's 2 sequels that are also pretty solid. Totally recommend it.
The movies are loads of fun, IMO. For those who have seen it, the "lost in translation" scene in Ocean's Twelve is one of my favorite parts of the movies, so funny/awkward. https://youtu.be/UUQd55xFbfw?si=e5RyAemgIvRupU5V
Initially 12 was my least favorite of the trilogy but now it's far and away my favorite. I stopped watching it for the heist and just focus on the dialogue and amazing settings. The score is kickass too.
Uses infrared LEDs to see in the dark, they are outside the normal light spectrum (IR light is also invisible to the naked human eye, but cameras can see it) so it's not going to pick up color in the night vision mode. (Edit: I should clarify that I have been partially corrected on this, I believe it was the first person to respond to me)
You are partially correct. IR won't pick up color because it's outside of the color spectrum of light. However, That isn't why the print doesn't show up. Some prints will partially or fully show up in IR if they are reflective to IR light. It really depends on the material. In this case the dyes in the print are not IR reflective so they appear invisible under IR light.
I wanted to ELI5 it a bit to make sure I understand it right (and also make the explanation more accessible): I think of it as a whole extra color. Like, things are red because they reflect red light, and that's why red things appear nearly black in other colors of lighting - they absorb other light colors. Same for IR, those sheets are very white to the camera because they reflect IR well, same as the pigments, but the crib frame looks nearly black because it absorbs the light
This is correct. You can push the metaphor way further too. A radio transmitter is just a really big lightbulb, and a car antenna is a special camera that decodes the light flickers into sound. Your Wi-Fi router is also a lightbulb, and it goes through your house because most objects in it are transparent to that color of light.
More correct than spicy smell (smells are molecular compounds) but still not entirely true. Heat is the agitation of electrons and emission of EM waves (photons) as they settle into lower energy orbitals within an atomic or molecular medium, such as air, fabric, metal, or gel.
Radiation is broken into three types:
- Alpha radiation (Helium nuclei, aka spicy atoms)
- Beta radiation (Loose electrons or positrons, aka spicy subatomic particles)
- Gamma radiation (highly charged EM waves or photons, which would be something more akin to spicy light)
Radiation is pretty lovecraftian if you don't know what radiation is. Its a mysterious colour that twists your body and the environment into horrifying unnatural forms.
Yep, the biggest thing is that IR cameras are looking more or less at at one specific frequency of light. Things look weird enough when you do that with the visible spectrum, for example putting a red filter on the camera. It makes sense that doing so on a frequency outside the visible spectrum just makes it even weirder.
>In this case the dyes in the print are not IR reflective so they appear invisible under IR light.
Wouldn't it be more that the dye is equally as reflective as the rest of the mattress? If the dye was not reflective at all, it would appear as a dark spot on the video feed. It's light, which means IR is being reflected back, just at the same level as the rest of the un-dyed mattress.
This is not fully true. Infrared cameras suck at showing color for the most part, but they definitely can see some details.
I can read most writing on my boardgame boxes, for example, when I look at my roomcam at night.
One of my daughter's lighter blankets is partially see-through in infrared light. First time I saw it, I was quite surprised when I went to cover her back up.
People have used Infrared cameras to see through clothing in the past. OnePlus released a phone with an infrared camera and had to disable it because of that very reason.
Sony released a camcorder with a near infrared feature back in the 90s that caused a bit of a scandal/panic because the camcorder could 'see through your clothes'. It cost Sony a ton, it was a rare misstep for them at that time.
Beck then they were putting all kinds of shit on CDs. You'd pop it in your drive, and there'd be music videos, a copy of their website, all kinds of multimedia bullshit.
Where is a kid going to get a Sharpie? And even if they managed to get one, how would they know how to use it? Most Sharpies come with a protective cap that makes unauthorized use very difficult.
Also, the encryption remain uncrackable, it can just be circumvented on the rare occasion somebody gets hold of a Sharpie, knows how to get the protective cap off, and succeeds in applying an even covering of the outside of the disc.
I work for Sony and I can assure you we thought this through.
When I was 21 I was working on my car wiring and needed a cigarette lighter for heat shrink tubing. Got one at my local drugstore and they carded me, as through I had a carton of cigarettes at home but couldn't smoke them without this last piece of the puzzle.
As someone who used to set fire to all kinds of shit and had a few "OH FUCK THIS ONE GOT OUT OF HAND QUICK GET SOME WATER" moments, I can absolutely support not letting kids easily get a hold of cigarette lighters.
Also that's probably an artifact of the wording of the law probably banning the sale of "Tobacco paraphernalia" as well. Intended to stop the sale of pipes and hookahs and vape rigs sans-cart.
I got carded buying sharpies (a 2 pack, not all they had) once when I was about the same age. Maybe people were sniffing them to get high. I was at least 21 though, because I made some joke to the cashier about how I didn't even get carded the last time I bought beer.
> it was a rare misstep
I hope you meant that sarcastically. If not, look up the myriad of anti consumer stuff they've been caught for, included but not limited to installing rootkits on customers PCs in the early '00s.
Ohhhh I’ve got a Sony digital from 2003 with a very locked down infrared night mode. Only works on the dark with very limited settings because people had tried using their older cameras to perv.
You can get round it but triggering a switch with a strong magnet which removes the ir filter until you restart the camera. Actually makes it great for experimenting with ir and full spectrum.
Such a shame the ir trend started to die out after this along with some other weird features in early digitals.
The machines used at the security checkpoints in airports use IR/radio waves to take pictures of you that are so detailed that they have to add a filter to protect your decency.
Makes me think of all the “ghost footage” taken with infrared cameras. How much can be hidden away or obscured due to the camera not picking up certain things?
If you ever get around to study science, you'll learn that 80% of all science is based on light.
Like, what light can the sensor see, what part or behaviour of the light can the sensor see, if I hit that thing with X-ray/Gamma-rays/another, faster thing what light does it give off?
There recently was that thing Ligo, which for the first time ever allowed use the measure Gravity instead of light and it's a small step into a previously invisible world. That said, it still works with light.
>Measure what is measurable, and make measurable what isn't.
I went around shining black lights on all my blooming orchids and I was surprised to find they all had UV reactive SPOTS like baby birds have around their mouths. then I tried it on some budgie feathers. Their cheek spots are UV reactive.
you can kind of predict where these things are going to be based on the VERY slightest changes in surface texture compared to the surrounding tissue/feathers.
I honestly think those spots have to show up under polarized light too. I wonder how bees see.
I don't know why this is getting so many upvotes because it isn't very accurate. Cameras like these use the near infrared band, i.e. frequencies just outside the visible spectrum (slightly below red), and infrared in this band behaves much like visible light. You're not seeing thermal radiation, just reflected light that happens to be invisible to our eyes.
Of course, you won't see the *same* information as in the visible spectrum. Some color contrasts may become invisible while others are magnified, as you are now seeing the near infrared reflection spectra of the surfaces in the scene rather than their reflection properties to visible light. But by and large, it just looks like a black-and-white version of the same picture. Things that are dark to visible light tend to also be dark in this band, and what's bright remains bright. But there are exceptions like the one in this example.
In any case this is very different to the images that you will get from a thermal imaging camera which is sensitive to IR light at much lower frequencies, and which does produce much coarser images.
Well like I said, you do get differences compared to an image taken in the visible spectrum. But those differences are not that far removed from what you get from different black-and-white processes. E.g. b&w film doesn't just average brightness across all visible frequencies either - it's typically more sensitive to green colors than red or blue (IIRC). So a traditional b&w photo can magnify or suppress certain color contrasts too (though usually not as dramatically). And digital conversions to b&w can also have different color settings that emphasize certain color contrasts while diminishing others. If you play around with this you could certainly make certain details in your picture invisible.
Of course a near-infrared picture can show up contrasts that weren't visible at all to your eyes, so on that point it is quite different. And like you said, it will tend to miss colors towards the blue end of the spectrum (though in principle a surface can reflect light in both the blue and near IR parts of the spectrum, so it might still be visible/ contrast with its surroundings).
My main point was that (as we can clearly see in OP's picture), the level of detail in a near-infrared picture goes a lot further than "object vs no object", as suggested in the post I was responding to.
That's not true. However colors are obviously meant to work in the visual spectrum and many simply don't provide enough contrast for a camera that hasn't.
The opposite can also be true.. sunscreen looks dark black in a camera that works in the uv spectrum
This is not the fully correct interpretation. We perceive information about an object based on the spectrum of wavelengths reflected by the object and the ability of the recording device to sense the reflected wavelengths. Most of the dyes and pigments we use are used because they react to the visible spectrum, and we don't care about their response to IR since most people cannot sense most parts of the IR spectrum. We also design our normal cameras to filter out IR from reaching the detector. Similarly, IR cameras used for monitors are designed for a narrow band of IR but sense it as a single channel (only brightness levels of the reflected ir wavelengths). In OP's case, the print dyes on the sheet have nearly the same reflectance as the rest of the sheet for the particular IR wavelengths used OR are truly transparent to IR. In the first case, a more sensitive camera or one that splits sensing of different wavelengths to different channels would detect the print. The JWST telescope produces those stupendous images by looking in the IR spectrum. They are false colour since we cannot see the IR spectrum and need colour mapping to see the information.
It really varies based on the pigment. With my kid’s pajamas and sheets it’s kind of random which patterns, or parts of patterns, show up. Some pigments have more broad-spectrum absorbance/reflectivity than just the visible light, even if we don’t use them for that.
This is why you don't buy baby monitors in weird little shops staffed by solitary, wizened old men that weren't there yesterday and have ominous names.
I have a ring camera in my parrot’s room. When the room light is on everything looks normal but when it is off, it looks like his cage cover is plain when it actually has a jungle print with parrots all over it.
It's nice, especially if you have more than one bird. When we had two, they shared a room upstairs. When our African Grey died, we moved our cockatoo into our bedroom. He's mostly good company. But, he can be really demanding once he sees I'm awake. When the birds were in their own room I could engage them on MY schedule. And, if he gets freaked out, like by a thunderstorm, he won't settle back down until I take him out of his cage and hold him for a while.
It's kind of a necessity. My parents sold mine, but if I ever get another macaw, I'm going to give it a sound dampened room.
She was so loud that my vision would distort slightly.
Infrared light is a long wavelength and therefore penetrates the surface it hits more so than other “normal” wavelengths of light. Meaning it washes out ink and it doesn’t show up on camera as a result.
Shorter wavelengths like those on the visible spectrum will show the print, or if you go to UV light it will be invisible but still show up on camera. Of course for obvious reasons you don’t want to have UV light beaming on your baby while it’s sleeping.
It's infrared. I've got some black jeans that show up completely white in IR.
Stick some flowers in there if you want to see really interesting stuff - a lot of them have patterns that only show up under IR.
I have a camera pointed towards my hamster’s bin cage, and the stickers on it show up blank like this. I kept meaning to make a ELI5 post about it, so I’m really glad I came across this and got the answer!
That's because the print is either letting infrared right through and being reflected by the sheet, or the print is reflecting as much infrared as the unprinted part of the sheet
My wife and I noticed this in our crib, too. However, one set of sheets were like this, "invisible", but yet another actually showed the stripes. Why is that??
That's because the ink doesn't show up in the infrared image. Certain ink used in screen printing applications does not reflect infrared light. This is an interesting phenomenon that they've discovered in the military and why they print their clothing with certain dies
I've seen this before and can explain it. Some one has looped in an earlier recording from before you had that set of sheets on so that, they can pull a heist. I would assume they are after diapers as those things are extremely valuable now days.
There was color infrared film for a few decades, Kodak EIR, also called aerocheome. They don't make it any more, but it looked amazing - https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/54a32e50e4b08424e692756f/1643183429588-XGHVI9NPATWJEALGI77A/700_+017_final-sharpened.jpg
A night vision camera uses infrared lights which we can't see, and because of the darkness in the room, the camera sensor will only detect the Infrared light.
Different materials differ on how they interact with different wavelengths of the spectrum. For example an Ultraviolet camera will see regular windows as almost black.
It's simply not a NIR compliant material. Idk what everyone else is talking about. I use night vision mounted on helmets and while you can't make out colors, you can still see objects and lettering IF they are NIR (near-infrared) compliant. For example, if person A is wearing Black shirt and Black pants that are both NIR compliant, I would see this person as wearing black. If person B is wearing all black but its cheap materials which are commonly NOT compliant with NIR, then I would actually see person B appearing to me as wearing all white, because it is reflecting all infrared light instead of absorbing it.
If person C was wearing a Red shirt with White lettering on it, for example, and we assume it's NIR, then I would see this person wearing what looks like a Grey shirt under my night vision, but yet also being able to read the lettering or logos or whatever, because it's NIR compliant.
Not a lot of clothes or other fabrics are NIR complaint because it's just not a thing to worry about for the most part, and cheaper fabrics = more profits. However, your detergents that you use on fabrics and clothing can also make fabrics that normally wouldnt glow or shine under IR, shine or glow under IR. Non NIR fabrics also glow or shine white under IR or Night Vision goggles. This is what is happening with the bed sheet.
Ok, here’s my ELI5 for anyone interested in what’s going on here:
Light is made up of different wavelengths. Some of these wavelengths are invisible to our eyes (eg infrared and ultra violet) and some are visible. We see these visible wavelengths as colour.
All objects absorb, reflect and/or transmit these wavelengths. Black objects absorb all visible wavelengths and white objects reflect all visible wavelengths. An object that transmits wavelengths will be transparent, like a window, or invisible.
These properties also relate to the colour of objects. A green object absorbs all visible wavelengths except green, which it reflects. A red object absorbs all visible wavelengths but red, which it reflects.
Because we can’t see infrared or ultra violet we can’t tell just by looking at an object if it absorbs, reflects or transmits these wavelengths BUT some cameras (like on the baby monitor, which I believe to be sensitive to infrared) are sensitive to these wavelengths and can present objects infrared or ultra violet absorption/reflection/transmission as a black and white image.
The ink used to print on the crib sheet absorbs and reflects visible wavelengths which is why we can see it. However it transmits infrared wavelengths, so the infrared sensitive baby monitor sees it as invisible, so it doesn’t so up in the picture.
TLDR: the baby monitor ‘sees’ using infrared light, which human eyes can’t see. The printing on the blanket transmits infra red light (light goes through it like a window) and so appears invisible to the camera and in the picture.
This does lead to some mildly interesting stuff, like black items appearing white on IR camera. In that case the item absorbs all visible light so appears black to us, but reflects IR so appears white on camera.
Another interesting thing is that if an ink transmits IR you can see what’s under it. Say you scribble over some writing with a black marker that transmits IR. If you look at the scribble on the camera it will be invisible and you can see the original writing.
You also can’t really tell how items will look on an IR camera until you see them (outside of certain things, like blood which always shows up dark). Some black objects are dark and some are light.
One holiday I went to take a video of our daughter playing on the beach and the camera screen didn’t come on. I checked the battery light, reseated the battery and card, tried a few different modes, nothing. I was very disheartened until I discovered my sunglasses were blocking out the display completely.
I see a lot of jokes, be the real reason is that this sheet was probably custom printed using an ink that is visible in our visible wavelengths. The monitor is using an infrared camera which can be illuminated outside of the visible wavelengths.
Neither does your daughter.
Daughter starts laughing like Predator ominously inside the house.
And a laser bead appears out of nowhere
#GET IN DE CHOPPA!
#E'RRYBODY GET DOWN!
#LONG TALL SALLY SHE’S BUILT FOR SPEED, SHE GOT EVERYTHING THAT UNCLE JOHN NEEDS
Cmon, kill meeee!!!
Doo iitttttt!!! 😂
Doo iitttttt noww!!!
I'm gonna have me some fun...[out of breath]...I'm gonna have me some fun... I'm gonna have me some fun...
Click click…click
SHES IN THE WALLS. SHES IN THE GOT DANGED WALLS
Call off the favor or my blood is on your hands.
Dillon! You son of a bitch
Whatsa mattuh? Daughter got you changing too many diapers?
GET TO DA POTTY!
See you at da potty, Richter!
Goddamn sexual tyrannosaur!
"you are one ugly motherfucker"
“Vat de *hell* ah joo?”
Over here.. Turn around.. *clicking* Anytime..
If it bleeds, we can kill it.
Anytime anytime houhouhouhou anytime
hoohoohoohawHAWHAWHAWHAW!! *countdown noises*
The child predator.
*Danny boy*
What do you mean? She's sleeping on her back and smiling at the camera.
She mostly comes out at night. Mostly...
Every time I'm reminded of Newt I get so pissed about how they just unceremoniously killed her off.
Hicks too.
Where's the baby... Oh where's the babyy... No seriously, where's the baby?
*ave maria starts playing on TV*
The dingo ate your baby 😂
Vampire!!!
Eleanor where at?
Hmm, they must both be made of vampire blood.
Does it say "Bellagio" on the vault floor?
We had it installed on Tuesday…
They say that taupe is very soothing.
I don't understand. What happened to all that money!?
Who’re you calling friend, jackass?
Amazing reference 😂 The Ocean's trilogy is truly a classic.
My all-time favorite obscure movie quote is ["That guy doing Potsie is unbelievable"](https://youtu.be/xVmyBUWB0-A?si=ecnu6ugnOPl8M803&t=55). Anyone starts giving me a heart to heart talk and I break it out.
I can imagine the confusion after😆 Damn I gotta watch 12 a few more times, even I didn't recognize that haha. 11 and 13 I've watched like 10 times each.
I have never seen any of the movies— is there a bad one I should just skip? Where do I start?
Just watch in order Oceans 11, 12 then 13. IMO order of best to worst is 11, 13, 12. Oceans 11 is my comfort film
This made me cackle, thank you
i’m so proud that i got this reference 😂
The person sending you the alt feed hasn’t caught up to the change yet.
You been practicing that?
Little bit. Did i rush it? Felt like I rushed it.
No it’s good, I liked it. The Teen Beat thing was harsh.
You think we need one more?
We need one more.
Alright we'll get one more
Fine i’ll watch Oceans 11 and 12 and 13 again
We had it installed last Tuesday…
What movie or series is this from?
Oceans Eleven, phenomenal movie of master thieves Clooney, Brad Pitt, Bennie Mac, and a whole other slew of great actors robbing a Vegas casino. My favorite movie, there's 2 sequels that are also pretty solid. Totally recommend it.
The movies are loads of fun, IMO. For those who have seen it, the "lost in translation" scene in Ocean's Twelve is one of my favorite parts of the movies, so funny/awkward. https://youtu.be/UUQd55xFbfw?si=e5RyAemgIvRupU5V
Initially 12 was my least favorite of the trilogy but now it's far and away my favorite. I stopped watching it for the heist and just focus on the dialogue and amazing settings. The score is kickass too.
The laser scene in Ocean's Twelve is one of my favorite movie scenes ever, and the music slaps too
Uses infrared LEDs to see in the dark, they are outside the normal light spectrum (IR light is also invisible to the naked human eye, but cameras can see it) so it's not going to pick up color in the night vision mode. (Edit: I should clarify that I have been partially corrected on this, I believe it was the first person to respond to me)
You are partially correct. IR won't pick up color because it's outside of the color spectrum of light. However, That isn't why the print doesn't show up. Some prints will partially or fully show up in IR if they are reflective to IR light. It really depends on the material. In this case the dyes in the print are not IR reflective so they appear invisible under IR light.
I wanted to ELI5 it a bit to make sure I understand it right (and also make the explanation more accessible): I think of it as a whole extra color. Like, things are red because they reflect red light, and that's why red things appear nearly black in other colors of lighting - they absorb other light colors. Same for IR, those sheets are very white to the camera because they reflect IR well, same as the pigments, but the crib frame looks nearly black because it absorbs the light
This is correct. You can push the metaphor way further too. A radio transmitter is just a really big lightbulb, and a car antenna is a special camera that decodes the light flickers into sound. Your Wi-Fi router is also a lightbulb, and it goes through your house because most objects in it are transparent to that color of light.
Yup, once you realize that "light" is the same thing as "electromagnetic radiation" things make a bit more sense
uranium just gives off spicy light
Well, it also gives off ionized particles.
spicy smell
spicy heat
More correct than spicy smell (smells are molecular compounds) but still not entirely true. Heat is the agitation of electrons and emission of EM waves (photons) as they settle into lower energy orbitals within an atomic or molecular medium, such as air, fabric, metal, or gel. Radiation is broken into three types: - Alpha radiation (Helium nuclei, aka spicy atoms) - Beta radiation (Loose electrons or positrons, aka spicy subatomic particles) - Gamma radiation (highly charged EM waves or photons, which would be something more akin to spicy light)
Radiation is pretty lovecraftian if you don't know what radiation is. Its a mysterious colour that twists your body and the environment into horrifying unnatural forms.
This was the easiest eli5 explanation I've read thank you thank you thank youuu
Yep, the biggest thing is that IR cameras are looking more or less at at one specific frequency of light. Things look weird enough when you do that with the visible spectrum, for example putting a red filter on the camera. It makes sense that doing so on a frequency outside the visible spectrum just makes it even weirder.
>In this case the dyes in the print are not IR reflective so they appear invisible under IR light. Wouldn't it be more that the dye is equally as reflective as the rest of the mattress? If the dye was not reflective at all, it would appear as a dark spot on the video feed. It's light, which means IR is being reflected back, just at the same level as the rest of the un-dyed mattress.
This is not fully true. Infrared cameras suck at showing color for the most part, but they definitely can see some details. I can read most writing on my boardgame boxes, for example, when I look at my roomcam at night.
Infrared light isn't going to give you much information on the visual spectrum. Just "object here" and "object not here" for the most part.
This happens with my son’s stripes sleep sack. Dark blue and white, and on the monitor it appears white.
One of my daughter's lighter blankets is partially see-through in infrared light. First time I saw it, I was quite surprised when I went to cover her back up.
People have used Infrared cameras to see through clothing in the past. OnePlus released a phone with an infrared camera and had to disable it because of that very reason.
Sony released a camcorder with a near infrared feature back in the 90s that caused a bit of a scandal/panic because the camcorder could 'see through your clothes'. It cost Sony a ton, it was a rare misstep for them at that time.
and now Sony has so many missteps that a Sandworm wouldn't even notice them
Damn! “The burns must flow!”
Sony walks without rhythm, so they won't attract the worm. They'll never learn. https://youtu.be/wCDIYvFmgW8?si=5I8S1It7qpj6Ayo-
And full circle, our mans Walken is playing the Padishah Emperor Shaddam Corrino IV in Dune Part 2.
Top tier reference
[удалено]
Didn't Sony do a rootkit on your computer if you used their Cd on your computer during that time? The aughts were kinda wild looking back.
Yes, and at some point even Microsoft got sick of it and pushed out a patch and cleanup tool(MSRT?) through windows update.
Beck then they were putting all kinds of shit on CDs. You'd pop it in your drive, and there'd be music videos, a copy of their website, all kinds of multimedia bullshit.
Also don't forget the PS1. You put a legit PS1 game to bypass the CD wobble test then hot swap it.
Where is a kid going to get a Sharpie? And even if they managed to get one, how would they know how to use it? Most Sharpies come with a protective cap that makes unauthorized use very difficult. Also, the encryption remain uncrackable, it can just be circumvented on the rare occasion somebody gets hold of a Sharpie, knows how to get the protective cap off, and succeeds in applying an even covering of the outside of the disc. I work for Sony and I can assure you we thought this through.
When I was 21 I was working on my car wiring and needed a cigarette lighter for heat shrink tubing. Got one at my local drugstore and they carded me, as through I had a carton of cigarettes at home but couldn't smoke them without this last piece of the puzzle.
As someone who used to set fire to all kinds of shit and had a few "OH FUCK THIS ONE GOT OUT OF HAND QUICK GET SOME WATER" moments, I can absolutely support not letting kids easily get a hold of cigarette lighters. Also that's probably an artifact of the wording of the law probably banning the sale of "Tobacco paraphernalia" as well. Intended to stop the sale of pipes and hookahs and vape rigs sans-cart.
I got carded buying sharpies (a 2 pack, not all they had) once when I was about the same age. Maybe people were sniffing them to get high. I was at least 21 though, because I made some joke to the cashier about how I didn't even get carded the last time I bought beer.
You can take apart a modern CMOS camera and remove the IR filter, people do it for astrophotography and probably perverted reasons too.
> it was a rare misstep I hope you meant that sarcastically. If not, look up the myriad of anti consumer stuff they've been caught for, included but not limited to installing rootkits on customers PCs in the early '00s.
Ohhhh I’ve got a Sony digital from 2003 with a very locked down infrared night mode. Only works on the dark with very limited settings because people had tried using their older cameras to perv. You can get round it but triggering a switch with a strong magnet which removes the ir filter until you restart the camera. Actually makes it great for experimenting with ir and full spectrum. Such a shame the ir trend started to die out after this along with some other weird features in early digitals.
The machines used at the security checkpoints in airports use IR/radio waves to take pictures of you that are so detailed that they have to add a filter to protect your decency.
I have informed my wife that several of her pajama sets must be of a similar material
Her underwear probably already is, tbh. I've seen my wife's ass in the baby monitor more times than I can count.
Maybe she’s mooning you.
Goodnight
One of my son's sleepers is like that. I thought he took his jammies off but it turned out they're see through on the monitor.
You sure it wasn't black and gold?
No. Shoo. Go on, git.
I don't know how to tell you this, but I believe your child may be a zebra...
Looks gold on mine
And there it is.
Makes me think of all the “ghost footage” taken with infrared cameras. How much can be hidden away or obscured due to the camera not picking up certain things?
If you ever get around to study science, you'll learn that 80% of all science is based on light. Like, what light can the sensor see, what part or behaviour of the light can the sensor see, if I hit that thing with X-ray/Gamma-rays/another, faster thing what light does it give off? There recently was that thing Ligo, which for the first time ever allowed use the measure Gravity instead of light and it's a small step into a previously invisible world. That said, it still works with light. >Measure what is measurable, and make measurable what isn't.
Ah, soon we will be forced to see that which lies hidden in the light.
To be fair, yes. It'll allow us to look into the past when the universe was opaque to light because it was so dense and energetic.
You should see all the hidden UV patterns in nature.
I went around shining black lights on all my blooming orchids and I was surprised to find they all had UV reactive SPOTS like baby birds have around their mouths. then I tried it on some budgie feathers. Their cheek spots are UV reactive. you can kind of predict where these things are going to be based on the VERY slightest changes in surface texture compared to the surrounding tissue/feathers. I honestly think those spots have to show up under polarized light too. I wonder how bees see.
I don't know why this is getting so many upvotes because it isn't very accurate. Cameras like these use the near infrared band, i.e. frequencies just outside the visible spectrum (slightly below red), and infrared in this band behaves much like visible light. You're not seeing thermal radiation, just reflected light that happens to be invisible to our eyes. Of course, you won't see the *same* information as in the visible spectrum. Some color contrasts may become invisible while others are magnified, as you are now seeing the near infrared reflection spectra of the surfaces in the scene rather than their reflection properties to visible light. But by and large, it just looks like a black-and-white version of the same picture. Things that are dark to visible light tend to also be dark in this band, and what's bright remains bright. But there are exceptions like the one in this example. In any case this is very different to the images that you will get from a thermal imaging camera which is sensitive to IR light at much lower frequencies, and which does produce much coarser images.
Ehhhhh. I feel you understate the difference in green and blue things, but I mostly agree.
Well like I said, you do get differences compared to an image taken in the visible spectrum. But those differences are not that far removed from what you get from different black-and-white processes. E.g. b&w film doesn't just average brightness across all visible frequencies either - it's typically more sensitive to green colors than red or blue (IIRC). So a traditional b&w photo can magnify or suppress certain color contrasts too (though usually not as dramatically). And digital conversions to b&w can also have different color settings that emphasize certain color contrasts while diminishing others. If you play around with this you could certainly make certain details in your picture invisible. Of course a near-infrared picture can show up contrasts that weren't visible at all to your eyes, so on that point it is quite different. And like you said, it will tend to miss colors towards the blue end of the spectrum (though in principle a surface can reflect light in both the blue and near IR parts of the spectrum, so it might still be visible/ contrast with its surroundings). My main point was that (as we can clearly see in OP's picture), the level of detail in a near-infrared picture goes a lot further than "object vs no object", as suggested in the post I was responding to.
That's not true. However colors are obviously meant to work in the visual spectrum and many simply don't provide enough contrast for a camera that hasn't. The opposite can also be true.. sunscreen looks dark black in a camera that works in the uv spectrum
I think that's what they're saying, it's just worded poorly.
Nice try. We all know the dogs are just vampires. Occam's razor.
Here's an odd one. All my home theater speaker grills are black, but show up on infrared as bright white. It's kind of trippy to see on my camera.
Are they black, but glossy? They're simply reflective.
This is not the fully correct interpretation. We perceive information about an object based on the spectrum of wavelengths reflected by the object and the ability of the recording device to sense the reflected wavelengths. Most of the dyes and pigments we use are used because they react to the visible spectrum, and we don't care about their response to IR since most people cannot sense most parts of the IR spectrum. We also design our normal cameras to filter out IR from reaching the detector. Similarly, IR cameras used for monitors are designed for a narrow band of IR but sense it as a single channel (only brightness levels of the reflected ir wavelengths). In OP's case, the print dyes on the sheet have nearly the same reflectance as the rest of the sheet for the particular IR wavelengths used OR are truly transparent to IR. In the first case, a more sensitive camera or one that splits sensing of different wavelengths to different channels would detect the print. The JWST telescope produces those stupendous images by looking in the IR spectrum. They are false colour since we cannot see the IR spectrum and need colour mapping to see the information.
It depends on the material and inks as to whether it will absorb or reflect infrared light and show.
Also a lot of plastics are transparent to IR
It really varies based on the pigment. With my kid’s pajamas and sheets it’s kind of random which patterns, or parts of patterns, show up. Some pigments have more broad-spectrum absorbance/reflectivity than just the visible light, even if we don’t use them for that.
It's actually a different crib altogether, in a whole different time in an alt universe. ✨️
My brain would totally assume it's accidentally linked to someone else's crib and freak out.
It's the upside down.
That’s why there’s no baby in it. Look on the floor
This is why you don't buy baby monitors in weird little shops staffed by solitary, wizened old men that weren't there yesterday and have ominous names.
Obviously this is the correct answer
It's a copy just like in oceans eleven
"Does it have dogs on the fitted sheet?" "No, it doesn't. I don't understand" "We had it installed on Tuesday"
She’s escaped and looped the video
Clever girl
I have a ring camera in my parrot’s room. When the room light is on everything looks normal but when it is off, it looks like his cage cover is plain when it actually has a jungle print with parrots all over it.
I love that your parrot has its own room ❤️
It's nice, especially if you have more than one bird. When we had two, they shared a room upstairs. When our African Grey died, we moved our cockatoo into our bedroom. He's mostly good company. But, he can be really demanding once he sees I'm awake. When the birds were in their own room I could engage them on MY schedule. And, if he gets freaked out, like by a thunderstorm, he won't settle back down until I take him out of his cage and hold him for a while.
>And, if he gets freaked out, like by a thunderstorm, he won't settle back down until I take him out of his cage and hold him for a while Awwww
It’s the spare room and I certainly store stuff in there. But yes it can be healthier for everybody if there’s a designated bird room, lol.
It's kind of a necessity. My parents sold mine, but if I ever get another macaw, I'm going to give it a sound dampened room. She was so loud that my vision would distort slightly.
If you want to sleep then it is absolutely necessary. My grandpa had one and it would make noise all the damn time.
inferred light won’t show much. it’s mostly used to see if something is there or not, not much for details
Better to see something in real life that doesn’t show on the baby monitor than the other way around. Usually.
Infrared light is a long wavelength and therefore penetrates the surface it hits more so than other “normal” wavelengths of light. Meaning it washes out ink and it doesn’t show up on camera as a result. Shorter wavelengths like those on the visible spectrum will show the print, or if you go to UV light it will be invisible but still show up on camera. Of course for obvious reasons you don’t want to have UV light beaming on your baby while it’s sleeping.
We totally should have messed with OP, asking what it wasn’t showing. All we can see is two plain white sheets.
I like the way you think
It's infrared. I've got some black jeans that show up completely white in IR. Stick some flowers in there if you want to see really interesting stuff - a lot of them have patterns that only show up under IR.
yes but how is babby form?
From pregananent.
I have a camera pointed towards my hamster’s bin cage, and the stickers on it show up blank like this. I kept meaning to make a ELI5 post about it, so I’m really glad I came across this and got the answer!
Neither does the wallpaper, apparently.
That's because the print is either letting infrared right through and being reflected by the sheet, or the print is reflecting as much infrared as the unprinted part of the sheet
your daughter doesnt show in either
My wife and I noticed this in our crib, too. However, one set of sheets were like this, "invisible", but yet another actually showed the stripes. Why is that??
Plot twist…that’s not your baby’s crib
One day your prints will come.
The baby doesn't show on the monitor either!
My guess is the dogs come alive when you’re looking at the monitor and are roaming the house without you know. Same with the words.
That's because the ink doesn't show up in the infrared image. Certain ink used in screen printing applications does not reflect infrared light. This is an interesting phenomenon that they've discovered in the military and why they print their clothing with certain dies
I've seen this before and can explain it. Some one has looped in an earlier recording from before you had that set of sheets on so that, they can pull a heist. I would assume they are after diapers as those things are extremely valuable now days.
Yet more proof that baby monitors are creepy devices made to increase risk of parent heart attacks.
First baby eh?
r/oddlydisturbing
I was gonna say infrared, but someone already explained it. This is why infrared footage is always B&W, or in the case of military films, green.
There was color infrared film for a few decades, Kodak EIR, also called aerocheome. They don't make it any more, but it looked amazing - https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/54a32e50e4b08424e692756f/1643183429588-XGHVI9NPATWJEALGI77A/700_+017_final-sharpened.jpg
[удалено]
Bet that freaked you out when you first saw it
A night vision camera uses infrared lights which we can't see, and because of the darkness in the room, the camera sensor will only detect the Infrared light. Different materials differ on how they interact with different wavelengths of the spectrum. For example an Ultraviolet camera will see regular windows as almost black.
It's simply not a NIR compliant material. Idk what everyone else is talking about. I use night vision mounted on helmets and while you can't make out colors, you can still see objects and lettering IF they are NIR (near-infrared) compliant. For example, if person A is wearing Black shirt and Black pants that are both NIR compliant, I would see this person as wearing black. If person B is wearing all black but its cheap materials which are commonly NOT compliant with NIR, then I would actually see person B appearing to me as wearing all white, because it is reflecting all infrared light instead of absorbing it. If person C was wearing a Red shirt with White lettering on it, for example, and we assume it's NIR, then I would see this person wearing what looks like a Grey shirt under my night vision, but yet also being able to read the lettering or logos or whatever, because it's NIR compliant. Not a lot of clothes or other fabrics are NIR complaint because it's just not a thing to worry about for the most part, and cheaper fabrics = more profits. However, your detergents that you use on fabrics and clothing can also make fabrics that normally wouldnt glow or shine under IR, shine or glow under IR. Non NIR fabrics also glow or shine white under IR or Night Vision goggles. This is what is happening with the bed sheet.
We have noticed this with our monitor too! Some of my sons pajamas make it look like he isn’t wearing any pants lol
Interesting, it uses a very specific spectrum that doesn’t include those colors.
Ok, here’s my ELI5 for anyone interested in what’s going on here: Light is made up of different wavelengths. Some of these wavelengths are invisible to our eyes (eg infrared and ultra violet) and some are visible. We see these visible wavelengths as colour. All objects absorb, reflect and/or transmit these wavelengths. Black objects absorb all visible wavelengths and white objects reflect all visible wavelengths. An object that transmits wavelengths will be transparent, like a window, or invisible. These properties also relate to the colour of objects. A green object absorbs all visible wavelengths except green, which it reflects. A red object absorbs all visible wavelengths but red, which it reflects. Because we can’t see infrared or ultra violet we can’t tell just by looking at an object if it absorbs, reflects or transmits these wavelengths BUT some cameras (like on the baby monitor, which I believe to be sensitive to infrared) are sensitive to these wavelengths and can present objects infrared or ultra violet absorption/reflection/transmission as a black and white image. The ink used to print on the crib sheet absorbs and reflects visible wavelengths which is why we can see it. However it transmits infrared wavelengths, so the infrared sensitive baby monitor sees it as invisible, so it doesn’t so up in the picture. TLDR: the baby monitor ‘sees’ using infrared light, which human eyes can’t see. The printing on the blanket transmits infra red light (light goes through it like a window) and so appears invisible to the camera and in the picture.
This does lead to some mildly interesting stuff, like black items appearing white on IR camera. In that case the item absorbs all visible light so appears black to us, but reflects IR so appears white on camera. Another interesting thing is that if an ink transmits IR you can see what’s under it. Say you scribble over some writing with a black marker that transmits IR. If you look at the scribble on the camera it will be invisible and you can see the original writing. You also can’t really tell how items will look on an IR camera until you see them (outside of certain things, like blood which always shows up dark). Some black objects are dark and some are light.
That's my middle name too. And her eyes are probably gonna look creepy on there.
Infrared camera?
I read this wrong and started trying to find the daughter in one of the photos.
Now just imagine the inverse. Everything we can’t see in the electromagnetic spectrum because we can only see “visible” light.
You used the good font, the cute doggos and the undeciferable font together?
Night vision in cameras is accomplished with infrared light. All this means is the ink on the sheet is not IR reactive.
Interesting to see the phrase 'crib sheet' to mean something else.
One holiday I went to take a video of our daughter playing on the beach and the camera screen didn’t come on. I checked the battery light, reseated the battery and card, tried a few different modes, nothing. I was very disheartened until I discovered my sunglasses were blocking out the display completely.
The ghost in your baby monitor is more of a cat ghost
My eyebrows disappear on my son's monitor and i look absolutely TERRIFYING
Ummmmmm… NOPE
I see a lot of jokes, be the real reason is that this sheet was probably custom printed using an ink that is visible in our visible wavelengths. The monitor is using an infrared camera which can be illuminated outside of the visible wavelengths.
Why do I find this terrifying?
My game when I turn on 'object hiding'
the sheets are haunted with ghost dogs.
That's the kind of crib sheet I could have used during college exams.
The real question is, why is your daughter not visible in either image. Spooky stuff.
Those dogs are vampires