9 ms·
Mercedes uses LEDs and a Camera to make "invisible car" for marketing
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- got2surf 15y agoI agree completely, it's not "really" environmentally invisible, and a shift towards mass transit would be much more environmentally friendly. I visited family in London this summer, and I was amazed by the efficiency of mass transit. Here in the States, I live in a suburb of a suburb of Orlando, and I can't get anywhere without having to drive 20 minutes. What a waste of both time and resources.
- CamperBob 15y agoHow fair is it to compare a medium-sized city in Florida with one of the largest metropolitan areas in the UK?
- got2surf 15y agoProbably not completely fair but... have you visited Orlando recently? Literally no public transport at all (ok, there's Lynx, but that's too nightmarish to really include). Sure, Orlando's not as large a metropolitan area, but with the amount of tourism we get from Disney, you'd expect a slightly more developed infrastructure. But point taken, probably not the best comparison to make.
- vibrunazo 15y agoI think you're taking "artistic freedom" a bit too literally. It's meant to inspiring and show their goals and mission. I don't think they have the intention of deceiving anyone into believing the car is actually invisible to the environment.
- pohl 15y agoWhen I first saw that phrase while watching the video, I thought to myself: "I bet the top-voted comment is a pedantic reaction to that."
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- david_shaw 15y agoIf a car manufacturer can create this technology as a marketing stunt, I'd be really interested to understand the (existing) military applications of "active cloaking." It doesn't really make things completely invisible, but it sure does seem like excellent camouflage.
- sanswork 15y agoIt only works if you're staring right at it though. Once you change the angle it looks very wrong.
- FaceKicker 15y agoYeah, you really need something like they do in Mission Impossible 4 where it has a single target whose eye it's tracking, changing the perspective projection accordingly.
- archivator 15y agoI wonder if you could use multi-faceted light emitters, capable of showing a different colour on each face. It wouldn't solve the issue completely but would definitely alleviate it!
- logic 15y agoI was actually just thinking about this. We're almost at the point now where you could reasonably package multiple LEDs into a multi-surface package, and do so relatively cost-effectively. The other side (pun intended) of this problem, though, is that you'd also want to capture imagery from as many perspectives as you planned on reproducing, which is a slightly more involved packaging issue. ;)
- ars 15y agoYou would need to emit at infrared and UV also. As soon as anyone started doing this it would be standard to check things in multiple frequencies.
- sanswork 15y ago
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- rdc5003 15y agoone
- cww 15y agoThe technology seems pretty crude, but it's cool, nonetheless.
- CitizenPremier 15y agoI think the most relevant question is, if you weren't looking for it, would you spot it? Right now it obviously draws a lot of attention to itself (hence using it as an advertisement). On the other hand, I didn't actually notice it in the first few images until it flickered. It might have some genuine applications in military and in surveillance; and if it does it's probably being used now without our knowledge.
- driverdan 15y agoNotice how the video is only 480 and not HD? I'm guessing it looks more impressive at low res since it's harder to see how low the "display" resolution is. Very cool but probably doesn't look as good in person.
- vibrunazo 15y agoJudging from the expression of those around it, I wouldn't be so sure.
- CamperBob 15y agoIn other news, people can be paid to appear surprised and delighted in a TV commercial. Ric Romero has more at 11.
- chc 15y agoI don't think the sarcasm is warranted. They could be actors, but they don't appear to be. The more likely explanation is that people think it's cool despite the low resolution. Do you know how many people would think it was straight-up voodoo if I just wrote a Node.js chat app and ran it for them?
- mmahemoff 15y agoThe ad maker can also film people all day and cherry-pick the results. Tell people you're shooting an ad, give it enough time, and you'll even have people jumping up and down for chat.js.
- lusr 15y agoI go to many music festivals and often take photos while I'm there. In 2-3 hours I'm pretty much always guaranteed to produce at least 10 awesome photos of people with little effort. People who want to be photographed find you and go out of their way to do something interesting for the camera.
- 15y ago
- rochoa 15y agoTop Gear guys did something similar in its Top Gear at the Movies special a few months ago: http://youtu.be/cZBqq-UaK98?t=34s http://youtu.be/cZBqq-UaK98?t=34s
- hinathan 15y agoThis is a much more sophisticated version of something that's been tried off and on since 1943 — http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffused_lighting_camouflage http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffused_lighting_camouflage
- CitizenPremier 15y agoI don't think you could really categorize it as the same thing; illumination does not refer to producing an image to match your background.
- hindsightbias 15y agoPanther Modern Wheels
- caycep 15y agothis is the camo built into Major Kusanagi in Ghost in the Shell!
- l33tbro 15y agoI don't want to sling mud at Ycombinator here .. but something is a bit fishy. This is currently the top voted article on HN, but it has only 300 views on Youtube (and 1100 likes - wtf). Please tell me this isn't a paid spot - mercedes trying to infiltrate an early adopter set. I don't want to jump to conclusions, but that would compromise everything about HN that we love.
- nodemaker 15y agoThats a known bug on youtube.Videos show 304 views initially for quite some time.(The like count however seems accurate and this video has around 1700 likes) In fact to verify, you can watch the video yourself 5 times and see if the view count changes from 304.
- tumultco 15y agoHere's the support article from google which describes why viewcounts become frozen around the 300 mark: http://support.google.com/youtube/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=175736 http://support.google.com/youtube/bin/answer.py?hl=en&an...
- l33tbro 15y agoThanks for the link. Knew it had to be something like that.
- got2surf 15y agoI submitted this, and definitely wasn't paid by YT/YC/Mercedes to do so :P
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- rewind 15y agoThis is only bad if your real goal is pushing the specific car. If you're more concerned with brand awareness, or being remembered as innovative or creative or doing something unexpected, this type of commercial can be very effective. I'll definitely remember that it's Mercedes. I'll bet a lot of people on HN remember the Darth Vader kid was in a VW commercial, even though they may not remember which car it was an ad for or what the car looked like. They probably know that the talking baby is in an eTrade commercial, even though they might not remember what he was talking about. But I'll agree with you that it is really easy to waste your marketing dollars on these commercials if the message isn't somehow making the viewer remember the brand. The ones that just celebrate the creativity of the ad firm ARE terrible; I just don't think this was an example of that.
- randlet 15y agoOnly tangentially related, but it really bugs me how these vehicles are being marketed as "zero-emissions" and being "invisible to the environment". Clearly the energy is being generated, and hence negatively impacting the environment, somewhere. It's just outright dishonest.
- ars 15y agoIt uses hydrogen, which is pretty hard to make and transport. If they actually wanted to be environmentally friendly (instead of just having the PR) they would use natural gas which already has a good transportation network. Hydrogen is better PR since at the car there are no emissions. So which to choose? Better PR or better for the environment?
- X-Istence 15y agoNatural gas is already really big in Europe, with a lot of cars driving on natural gas, so I am not so sure that adding Hydrogen to the mix would be that much more expensive.
- ars 15y agoHydrogen would definitely be much more expensive. Hydrogen leaks, a LOT, it's really hard to contain and ship. You would need a built a whole new infrastructure, and existing one for natural gas would not work.
- ugh 15y agoThat’s not even it. Natural gas is boring. Those cars are everywhere, they are nothing new or special.
- burgerbrain 15y agoYou certainly can make cars with close to zero emissions. Solar energy via bio-fuel is one way, though there are some energy inputs required to make the fuel. A steam powered car that burns wood could possibly be more efficient in that sense however.
- 15y ago
- encoderer 15y agoMercedes really has a fantastic heritage of "hacking" the driving experience. While other manufacturers have their own versions of modern safety tech, I've never seen it used as thoroughly across the lineup of cars as I do with Mercedes. I bought a Mercedes for only one specific reason: It's very credibly the safest car I can put my family in that is also fun to drive. The safety tech on a commonly equipped Mercedes today is what you'll see on all cars in 5-10 years. Things like active blind spot assist -- If there's a car in my blindspot and I try to change lanes into it, the car will use the brakes on the leading side of the car to nudge me back into my lane. And active lane keeping assist -- it applies that same tech to prevent me going left of center if it thinks I'm drifting and not doing it intentionally. Attention assist -- it tracks my driving style and engagement and alerts me if I'm drifting off. Not to mention, just a lot of smart tech: Apply the brakes ever so slightly when it's raining to keep them dry. Seatbelt pretensioner's. And structural things -- an extra firewall in the engine compartment. More, stronger clasps on the hood. Many of these features are found on other makes. But as a package, combined with a fantastic 7 speed automatic and turbo charged 8cl engine, Mercedes sells a wonderful car. Please excuse me for being such a fanboy!!!
- ars 15y agoWhat does "fun to drive" mean? I've heard it many times, but I've never been able to understand it, and I've driven a variety of cars.
- sukuriant 15y agoDo you like driving cars? Cars that are 'fun to drive' for me (and it's a very subjective thing) are cars where I feel like I am a part of the car. As a driver, I'm encased in the vehicle. It does what I tell it to, how I tell it to do it. It can take corners just as fast as I like them; and I can feel the g's inside the corner. tl;dr: I feel like I am the car
- Willwhatley 15y agoIt's a point on a subjective continuum of how responsive the car ui is. If cars are not your preferred tool, you likely don't care and won't notice differences that would stand out to a self identified 'driver'. I like fountain pens. I process using a good steel or gold nib as a sensual satisfaction similar in degree (although not kind) to a good backscratch. Some pens are fun to write with. Some ... .
- rosstafarian 15y agoThis is the same concept as the guy that made a halloween costume out of 2 ipad's[1] yes it's nothing new but it's still damn cool and gets people talking. [1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6p5mbp_M98 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6p5mbp_M98
- dazbradbury 15y agoLooks like a primitive version of the invisibility cloak from several years back [1]. Am sure someone made a more advanced version of this after the James Bond film came out though. Lots of tiny cameras interleaved with led's covering the surface of the vehicle... [1] http://science.howstuffworks.com/invisibility-cloak-news.htm http://science.howstuffworks.com/invisibility-cloak-news.htm
- verran 15y agoFunny thing, the tech used by Microsoft Surface utilises (pixel sense http://news.softpedia.com/news/Microsoft-Surface-2-0-PixelSense-Pixels-that-See-the-User-Interaction-209322.shtml http://news.softpedia.com/news/Microsoft-Surface-2-0-PixelSe...) the screen pixels as the cameras to capture the environmental data. Now, if you could combine that with the latest 3D tech they are pushing these days, the glasses free type, you could make a directional cloaking device with very little of the problems seen in the video.
- Ralith 15y agoThe only glasses-free 3D tech I know of works by restricting the viewing angle of each of the two sets of pixels to such a small area that each eye gets a different set. That would make the viable "invisible" view positions even more constrained than with the technique shown in the video.
- geoffschmidt 15y agoOf course, it doesn't actually look invisible unless you're standing in exactly the right place. That is why the stationary shots at the beginning of the video look so much more "invisible" than the moving shots later in the video. If you pause on those later shots, you'll see that there are big discontinuities around the boundary of the car. Thought experiment: imagine the car as a sheet of glass. Think of yourself standing at position A and looking at a point X on the glass. You see a position A' behind the glass. Now imagine moving to a position B and looking at the same point X on the glass. You see a different position B'. The LEDs don't know if you are at position A or B, so they can't know whether to show the light from A' or B'.
- X-Istence 15y agoDo you really have to be such an extreme kill joy? I think anyone that watched the video would see the exact same thing we both saw, yes, it isn't perfect, yes if you aren't looked straight on you won't see it, but goddamnit if it isn't an awesome effect that is going to get people talking and will generate buzz for Mercedes and overall is an absolutely awesome way to advertise that your car looks "invisible" to the world it is driven in.
- Drbble 15y agoBut parent is also right metaphorically. Once the car starts moving, consuming energy and filling traffic, it is not longer invisible to the world.
- javert 15y agoI actually really appreciated that comment, because I had forgotten about that and was thinking "wow, invisibility is way easier than I thought."
- pkulak 15y agoHe's not a killjoy. It only works in the video. If you saw it on the street, at another place except directly in line, it would just look silly.
- geoffschmidt 15y ago
- barcoder 15y agoThis is nice, but it looks as the team making the video hasn't used "real" footage, instead adding a layer of video of over the LEDs to make the image cleaner. Some of the shots clearly show the LEDs though.
- gyom 15y agoNote also that only one side of the vehicle has the cloaking. The other side is just ugly cameras and we can see that at the very end of the video (1:15). It's not quite the invisibility cloak yet.
- gregatragenet 15y agoOMG I hope they bring it to burning man.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- jakeonthemove 15y agoOh man, I had this idea ever since I saw "Die Another Day". Always wondered if it would work in real life - apparently, it does!
- pkulak 15y agoDid they figure out how to make one without putting a half a million dollars worth of platinum in it yet?
- inghoff 15y agoWhat's the song?