Technology for the Rich and Famous: Anti-Paparazzi Shield

"Infrared lasers detect the electronic light sensors in nearby cameras, known as charge-coupled devices."

I smell BS. Anyone care to speculate how this would work?

Also, only two swimming pools? Come on.

I agree, sounds very fishy. The detection method as described does not make any sense. An IR laser hitting a CCD camera could blind it, but what happens when this laser hits a retina? Owner may need all his remaining money for the lawsuits. Even if this system existed as described, it would be easily nullified by any old film camera or a good IR filter.

As for privacy, if they DON'T want people to see what (or who) they are doing, then they should go INSIDE and close the curtains!

Sensors on bord detect the IR from the cameras (used for focus setting). This gives the position of the camera (by triangulation most probably) and allows a laser to send a low power IR ray direction lens or even a visible light ray which will disturb enough the camera's sensor (which is a charge coupled device among others). The ray has to be low power with respect to the eye sensitivity limits but powerful enough to harm the recorded image and make it not usable.

It seems to me feasible although risky, existing technology will allow it but I do not know how it could work at ranges as big as the telelenses work today.

A quick google and patent search did not produce any results. With very little information (the main source seems to be the Times article written by a reporter based on marketing and PR information)

It could be a variant of the one below (except with a low-energy, non-visible wide angle infrared pulse or strobe to prevent the digital pictures from coming out in focus).

http://www.gizmag.com/anti-paprazzi-clutch-bag/12169/

I fail to see how it would detect and stop an SLR camera equipped with a zoom lens taking pictures from far away however.

I suspected the ship board detection/aiming system might try to use the auto focus IR emitted from most digital cameras. On my digital camera, longer range photos (beyond several meters) don't need or use the IR auto focus.

Wonderful idea from the gizmag link.

I've had friends and family wedding photos ruined by overlapping flashes. The slave flash seems an easy and safe defense for those annoying "night ambushes".

However, daytime ambush photos don't use a flash so both system have limited capabilities.

A few years ago I read of a similar system for installation in cinemas to prevent pirating of films. This detected the characteristic IR reflections from a CCD and used a low power IR laser targeted on the CCD to temporarily blind the camera.

Using a wide difuse beam or set of IR beams to scan the environment around the ship and detect CCD chips sounds like a good start. The old starwars system was using a difuse IR beam to locate and pinpoint the position of flying missiles at great speeds. The a colimated green beam to pinpoint and calculate missile speed and wind velocity/turbulances and finaly the acting high power beam to deactivate or assault the travelling missile.

A similar system could pinpoint the cameras asuming that there is a known reflective component in all cameras.

Once pinpointed there is no problem to target the lens specifically and avoid the photographer's eyes with a focussed higher power beam IR, visible or near visible.

In June I was reading about a device built by the Starwars system engineers that pinpointed male flies (or moskitos I cant remember) and as I remember castrated them, by ablating their reproductive tissues I assume. A bit too expensive for the average african, indian or indonesian suffering from malaria infested bug bites, but Abramovic wouldn't mind one on the boat. And if they can do that I'm sure they can blind a camera and castrate the camera man too if they need to!

there is nothing like having a jar of old fashion grease less vanishing cream on hand

no batteries

and oh yea

a dash of sulfide perfume for up close whiffs