Detection of oxygen in blood. The ear is the best pace to detect it using IR, and a camera is better that a photodiode at rejecting background noise.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Still 'Exploring' New AirPods With Tiny Cameras
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Surveillance by Apple ? What are you speaking about ?
FaceID use an IR camera.
Do you think Apple is developing products and options people are “asking” ? It doesn’t work like that
Well, somebody inside Apple must be asking for it or thinking there’s a good idea or they wouldn’t be doing it at all
People that work at Apple are also normal people so it’s fair to wonder why they think this is a desirable concept to pursue
Sounds like no informed consent.
The real news, “Apple still using ‘AirPods with cameras’ to flush out leakers”
Way to out yourself as someone more paranoid than healthy.
They would „surveil“ little more than they already would need to.
Nobody is that interested in low quality footage of everything happening beneath your ears, stop it. 😂
Last edited:
Here's what I was replying to:
If you were picking a camera to do any of these things, an IR camera would be spectacularly bad at that job. No one needs AirPods to have cameras that can read a menu in the dark, to ask what color shirts go with which pants in the dark, to take a picture of a sofa in the dark. What do AirPod users tend to have with them? Their phones, which already have a camera that is the right tool to do all of those things.
I'm a photographer and I've used IR-converted digital cameras and, before that, IR film. IR is best for detecting temperature, and differentiating the heat of an object from other things that are reflecting/emitting a different amount of heat. An IR sensor is going to read things at the same ambient temperature as very nearly the same. Ink on a page and the page itself would be seen as the same, with very few exceptions. Low light is not one of them. If you were picking a camera to "read" a menu, an IR camera would be much less efficient than a camera that operates on the visible spectrum. It would require an IR emitter as well as a camera (the item specifically says they would only be cameras, similar to a Face ID receiver, and not emitters), and specific materials and inks to make it work. File the menu idea under "is it technologically possible? Yes, under some few circumstances. Is it likely that this is a use case? Not remotely." Chalk on a restaurant sign, as you mention, would be spectacularly difficult to read if that sign is on the sidewalk at midday or even outdoors in the cold under outdoor lighting at night. Whereas a camera that operates in the visible spectrum, like the ones in our phones, can easily do the job.
Likewise for discerning colors of clothing. IR does not detect differences in colors the way you describe, outside of the "is it possible, under narrow conditions and with specific materials and temperatures that are a much more important part of the equation than color" land of theory, as opposed to real world usage. IR detection of any colors are easily swamped by differences in reflected/emitted heat of the subject being seen. IR cameras are better to figure out whether you have a fever than what color your socks are.
Lastly, determining the health of a plant by turning an IR camera toward it can be done but once again it would need to be in a narrow temperature range so variations in reflected/emitted heat can be discerned. Try it outdoors on a sunny day and there goes that use case. What you're asking for is that AirPods come with IR cameras, emitters and thermometers, and even then they would be a solution in search of a problem. The least efficient way to do what you described.
Well, You are definitely confusing simple facial recognition which can be done (by anyone) after the fact from almost any photo you've taken anywhere, posted online previously or from any government id at any time, which has been possible for many years now…
Yes, states will do simple facial recognition on the 2D photo that they take of your face when you get your license, that is standard procedure now.
It is not really the most accurate or reliable. (Movies and TV grossly exaggerate its capabilities so you may be influenced by that as well)
Apples Face ID uses facial mapping, which is why you have to rotate your face and do it multiple times etc.
Much more accurate for facial detention from various angles etc.
Last edited:
Spatial computing is an inevitable additional computing platform all major software and hardware manufacturers will accommodate.
There’s an abundance of use cases in which a phone is too cumbersome and detrimental to being present, productive, and even safe over using spatial computing hardware.
Even use cases such as portable computing n-the-go productivity via screens can easily better met and handled (or more convenient) by spatial computing hardware—especially prosumer ones such as the Vision Pro that offer 5K2K with premium HDR support yet to be rivaled by any ultra wide monitor
Less trade-offs than rollable screen laptops, glasses-free and headset-free spatial computing monitors such as Brelyon ones; as well as other mitigations attempting to prolong the viability of traditional computing platforms compared to spatial computing hardware.
Last edited:
Folks, as the Gurman etc. rumors state, these wouldn’t be visible light spectrum cameras, but rather infrared cameras (more like sensors) used for head tracking by looking at your immediate surroundings at relatively low resolution. The lower resolution and field of view needed for head tracking doesn’t require the type or size of lenses and sensors needed by full-blown visible light cameras, and there isn’t enough room in Airpods for such cameras anyway, as small as such cameras can be made these days. But because these infrared head trackers would have a tiny sensor and lens, they're still technically "cameras".
So for at least the first release, these wouldn’t be used for taking photos. Hard to say about future versions.
What I don't understand is that these rumors claim that one of the things these IR cameras would be used for is head tracking to enhance spatial audio when wearing Airpods while using an AVP. The AVP already has good head tracking that it uses for spatial audio for its built-in speakers, including directionality, so why can't that data be sent to a new Airpods design that can then do its own spatial audio things without needing a duplicate set of head tracking sensors? Maybe that approach is somehow clumsy or limiting, and in-ear head IR tracking cameras might be better or even more accurate for this use case. But also it seems Apple wants a future version of the Airpods Pro to be standalone head trackers, without needing an AVP.
The rumor also says 'The infrared cameras could potentially enable "in-air gesture control" as well, allowing for device interaction with hand movements.' But if the device being mentioned is the AVP, it already has in-air gesture control, so my guess is these IR cameras might be intended to replace the Airpods' stem control.
So for at least the first release, these wouldn’t be used for taking photos. Hard to say about future versions.
What I don't understand is that these rumors claim that one of the things these IR cameras would be used for is head tracking to enhance spatial audio when wearing Airpods while using an AVP. The AVP already has good head tracking that it uses for spatial audio for its built-in speakers, including directionality, so why can't that data be sent to a new Airpods design that can then do its own spatial audio things without needing a duplicate set of head tracking sensors? Maybe that approach is somehow clumsy or limiting, and in-ear head IR tracking cameras might be better or even more accurate for this use case. But also it seems Apple wants a future version of the Airpods Pro to be standalone head trackers, without needing an AVP.
The rumor also says 'The infrared cameras could potentially enable "in-air gesture control" as well, allowing for device interaction with hand movements.' But if the device being mentioned is the AVP, it already has in-air gesture control, so my guess is these IR cameras might be intended to replace the Airpods' stem control.
Last edited:
Not sure when the last time you went to the DOL was but it’s more than a digital camera. They’re deploying a specialized camera system with facial mapping to compose a 3D template of your face including eye sockets, cheekbones etc. it is so important they are directed to capture a scan for every interaction whether you apply for a license or not.
I went quite recently to the DMV and my state does not have anything more than a standard camera.
But there are no states currently claiming/admitting to using such technology for drivers license photos to my knowledge. They do, however brag about using 2D facial recognition technology in at least 39 states now, which is again not the same as 3D facial mapping.
So I can’t see why they wouldn’t be admitting one versus the other because most states like to barge about who has the best whatever.
But again this will vary state by state and each state may not explicitly state what exact kind of technology they are using so I will give you that.
But your generalized claim that they are all using full 3d facial mapping is incorrect for sure.
If you can provide any reliable sources that this is being done in even 1 state, I’d be interested to read about it. However, I can only find sources claiming the use of facial recognition for a majority of states. (the ones not in that majority have even older systems)
Also I wouldn’t be surprised if 3d facial mapping becomes the norm in government IDs eventually I just don’t think it’s happening yet.
edit: I came back to add that I had never heard of a DOL before (but sounds legit) 😂 I started to think maybe you’re not even in the US and that’s why there was a disconnect, but it looks like Washington state is the only US state that issues drivers licenses via a department of licensing.
Also wanted to add that my wife and I both have had interactions with the DMV (which issues DL in my state) quite recently and I remember telling my wife at her appt that she would need to take a new photo but they didn’t even make her do that 🤷🏻♂️.she was mad I made her fix her hair for nothing
Last edited:
All Airpods from the first models already contain accelerometers, but earlier models used a simpler type to detect just whether the Airpods are being worn or removed, and for touch and tap gestures. The Airpods 3 contain a more advanced accelerometer that also allows them some degree of head motion sensing, which they use for some degree of directional spatial audio. The Airpods Pro 2 add a gyroscope for even better head motion sensing for better spatial audio effects, fitness tracking, the ability to perform actions like answering or rejecting phone calls when the user nods or shakes their head, etc.
Accelerometers alone are good for fast detection of relatively fast movement, or just turning your head left and right, sometimes better than cameras, but they don't have quite the ability to detect micro-movements that Apple might want to. IR cameras can capture these tiny movements in finer detail than by just using accelerometers alone, but using all three together (accelerometers, gyroscopes, and IR cameras), fusing their data, you get head tracking that approaches what's in better VR headsets, which might be what Apple wants to achieve in Airpods too.
Also, accelerometers are subject to drift over time since they have no way to see fixed external points of reference. IR cameras can see external points of reference, even in low light or in the dark, and constantly update their location. So maybe Apple has run up against the limits of what accelerometers and gyroscopes alone, in ear buds, can do for head tracking, hence their investigation into using IR cameras in them as well. As another commenter mentioned in this thread, this might also enhance the use of Airpods with the Vision Pro and Apple's future headsets and glasses.
IR cameras can also sense hand movements, which is one of the future features for Airpods that this rumor mentions, and you can't do that with accelerometers and gyroscopes unless they're on your hands. In other words, adding IR cameras to Airpods wouldn't be just for improved head tracking just to improve the Airpod's spatial audio performance still further.
To make room for the IR cameras might require improvements in battery tech, or else we might be seeing bigger Airpods.
Last edited:
How about 'exlporing' bringing back the headphone jack?
