Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

usonian

(17,973 posts)
Wed May 14, 2025, 12:52 PM May 14

Just when you thought it was safe: Volvo EX90's Lidar Sensor Will Fry Your Phone's Camera

https://www.thedrive.com/news/volvo-ex90s-lidar-sensor-will-fry-your-phones-camera


Try to record a car's lidar sensor, and you'll see a trail of multicolored specks in its wake. Those are freshly fried pixels on the camera's image sensor. Screenshot via Reddit, The Drive

Oh {expletive}!!!

That pod on the roof of Volvo’s new electric SUV is essentially just shooting out a bunch of high-powered infrared beams, determining the distance of the vehicle’s surroundings by measuring the time taken for reflected light to return to the sensor. If you point your phone’s camera directly at those beams, you’ll observe some strange phenomena, like what’s happening in the image above. What you’re seeing is a laser frying pixels on one of the device’s image sensors.

snip

It should be said that the risk here is inherent to lidar technology, and has nothing to do with Volvo’s specific implementation on the EX90. In fact, earlier this year, the automaker even issued a warning against directing external cameras at the vehicle’s lidar pod for the very reasons discussed. “Do not point a camera directly at the lidar,” one support page admonishes in no uncertain terms. Unfortunately, while that sort of information might be clear to owners (the ones who crack open their vehicles’ manuals, anyway), this is something the entire public ought to be aware of, especially as semi-autonomous cars with lidar systems become more common on our streets.

snip

The company specifically called out “close-ups” as the problem, meaning that our phones should be safe with distant shots, and also offered a tip for those of us who may need to capture such images. (Thank you!) “Using filters or protective covers on the camera lens can help reduce the impact of lidar exposure,” Volvo said. “Some cameras are designed with built-in protections against high-intensity light sources.”

Do you get that? Take photos with your lens cap on! Now I have to test my filters for infrared transmission. And cell phones? Good luck with that.

The sensor Volvo uses in the EX90 is understood to be eye-safe, even if it’s not necessarily camera-safe. We’re no experts on laser imaging, so we’ll defer to Lidar News, which published back in January that “[t]he human eye is mostly sensitive to light in the visible spectrum (roughly 400-700nm) and less sensitive to [near-infrared] light. Because 1550nm is at a safer wavelength for the human eye, [the EX90’s laser] can operate at higher power.” Higher power translates to longer range, which is obviously critical for vehicles built to achieve any level of self-driving.


Duplicate post due to a network glitch was deleted.
5 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Just when you thought it was safe: Volvo EX90's Lidar Sensor Will Fry Your Phone's Camera (Original Post) usonian May 14 OP
Sensors are one thing. Human eyes are another! . . . .nt Bernardo de La Paz May 14 #1
So what you can't see can''t hurt you? usonian May 14 #2
No. I mean the opposite! I will be averting my eyes anytime I notice what might be LIDAR. . . . . nt Bernardo de La Paz May 14 #3
But it's infrared and you can't see it. usonian May 14 #4
Yes, of course, I know that. But if I see the LIDAR bump that you showed, then I will avert my eyes. Bernardo de La Paz May 14 #5

usonian

(17,973 posts)
2. So what you can't see can''t hurt you?
Wed May 14, 2025, 01:14 PM
May 14
https://blog.lidarnews.com/iphone-damaged-by-lidar/

The Luminar Iris uses a single 1550nm fiber laser. This wavelength is in the near-infrared (NIR) region of the electromagnetic spectrum – invisible to the human eye. So, you are not going to know whether the laser scanner you are photographing is on or off.

The 1550nm wavelength has many favorable properties. The human eye is mostly sensitive to light in the visible spectrum (roughly 400-700nm) and less sensitive to NIR light. Because 1550nm is at a safer wavelength (1) for the human eye, it can operate at higher power. The Luminar Iris operates with 1,000,000x pulse energy of 905nm while staying eye-safe. Higher power means longer ranges, an important property for autonomous vehicles.


Can infrared light harm your eyes?

UV light is a known contributor to cataracts.
https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/8589-cataracts-age-related

And so are microwaves.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/3068822/

Infrared is somewhere in-between.
(1) Is it really "safer"? Safer than what?
So now I have to test my camera filters, eyeglasses and polarized sunglasses for transmission curves?

Bernardo de La Paz

(56,076 posts)
3. No. I mean the opposite! I will be averting my eyes anytime I notice what might be LIDAR. . . . . nt
Wed May 14, 2025, 01:24 PM
May 14

usonian

(17,973 posts)
4. But it's infrared and you can't see it.
Wed May 14, 2025, 02:10 PM
May 14

By looking for pods on an auto, you are staring into it.
I avert my eyes for those bright headlights!
I posted earlier on the study which showed that they are getting brighter over time.

What if one of my landscape photos accidentally captures a high power infrared beam?
Those camera sensors are damn expensive!

Not having an infrared transmissometer, I'll look up curves on camera lenses and filters, eyeglasses, sunglasses and windshield???

Life got tougher, I guess.

Bernardo de La Paz

(56,076 posts)
5. Yes, of course, I know that. But if I see the LIDAR bump that you showed, then I will avert my eyes.
Wed May 14, 2025, 03:02 PM
May 14

If I see the bump it does NOT mean I'm staring at it.

Likewise if I see the bump, it does not mean a beam struck my eyes. For one thing I might see at a 90 degree angle. And if it does before I avert my gaze, that is still less than if I don't avert my gaze.

Life is not perfect.

Latest Discussions»Culture Forums»Photography»Just when you thought it ...