what some people dont understand is that is visible light that is everything we see is part of the elctromagnetic spectrum and that is also true of infra red (used in almost every commercial remote control for appliances) the only difference from you seeing a beautiful morning waking up in miami or australia and your remote control is the frequency our eyes arent tuned to that frequency so we dont see it the camera on this video was designed to recognise these frequencies so it could see
@voiceofreason2008 actually every ccd sensor is sensitive to near IR up to 900 something nanometers. Some cameras have an IR filter so the IR doesn't mess up the colors. Nightshot cameras obviously don't have one, and they're sensitivity is further increased.
Wow, there sure are some smarty smart people commenting on here. It's amazing what we've all learned from these Ginormous brains. Better watch what you upload on to you tube or they'll come along and make you feel soooo foolish.
However, we are all very lucky to have been born at the same time as these Gargantuan brainy titans and witness their superior logic!
You aren't seeing infrared. You're seeing the white light which your camera's photocell interprets infrared as. Even if your camera recorded genuine infrared, it would still be invisible to you, because you lack the photoreceptors necessary to see it.
How is that any different? It's still receiving infrared and displaying visible light on the display regardless.
I could make a camera that displays gamma rays as shit brown if I wanted to. That's still the same concept, and you're still not seeing invisible energy.
True, and they're all colors that we can't even comprehend. Everything we have ever seen has been a mixture of colors within the visible spectrum. If we were to see anything super- or sub-visible, they would be completely indescribable; although, if they fit the pattern of visible light, Infrared would be Red combined with "sub-visible color" and Ultraviolet would be Violet combined with "super-visible color". But anything past that would be unfamiliar.
I think those 'invisible' colours might follow the same old familiar looking '7 colour rainbow' 'octave' pattern, just at lower or higher vibrations. Where our visible spectrum ends at violet, red might begin again, just a higher frequency version of it. A clue to this is just looking at the colour violet itself; by logic the colour red is the most suitable colour that violet could adjacently naturally blend into. Like octaves in music, just the same old set of tones played at different pitches.
@BibFortuna4President nothing logic about it, they are just perceptions. Realistically , the only thing that differentiates them is wavelength. That is turned into a signal by our eyes, then out brain associates that with colors. The invisible colors just don't look like anything. Musical notes are a whole different thing. You can obtain one from the other by multiplying the number of hertz with the 12th order root of 2 for a half step.
@mrkiky I agree about how the brain translates frequency, but your 'statement' that there's no logical pattern is only an assumption. It doesn't prove of disprove whether it is or it isn't. Musical notes are an audible representation of frequency, so in that respect they are not a whole different thing; on the contrary, they are representing the same thing that light as made from (frequency).
@BibFortuna4President I agree that they are similar in some ways, but quite different in others.In the visible spectrum there is no harmony following a mathematical relation between colors. Also the closest thing you would end up with by trying to split the sound spectrum into "colors" would probably be bass, middle and treble.You can't compare the rainbow to an octave.And there is no logical pattern, it's all about perception.We can't imagine another color just like we can't another dimention.
Hahaha, it really says a lot about how fucking stupid people have gotten, when I present logical scientific fact, and you idiots vote my comment down because you're all too fucking white trashy and useless to appreciate the value of an education.
Actually you can see infrared light, but only if it was in high concentrated levels. You can use exposed film placed over goggles to filter out any visible light to do this, though you have to go out in daylight in order for you to see anything as there is a larger concentration of infrared light for you to pick up on. The only problem is your eye does not react to infrared light as it does visible light and you could risk retinal damage lol.
No, you can't. None of these anecdotal tricks people mention involve you actually seeing Infrared. They simply involve seeing the effects infrared has on certain materials and technologies. We simply lack the receptors to perceive the wavelength.
It's like the fact that nothing can ever possibly see an atom itself, although for different reasons. We can use tools to generate an image of the electrorepulsive field its charge generates, but we are simply incapable of seeing it.
If the only thing coming through a filtered goggle is IR light then you are seeing IR. The fact remains that exposed film layered together filters out all visible light except for IR, which can also be utilized to make IR lights out of spot lights though they do get hot after a short amount of time. The fact remains in high enough levels IR light will stimulate a visual response. If all visible light is filtered out.
The S cones have peak sensitivity at 564580 nm, but it's a bell curve, so there is still some sensitivity even down to 700 or 750 nm. Near infrared nominally starts at 750 nm, so pick the shortest wavelength you are willing to call infrared, and make the light intense enough, and you'll find people able to see it.
The Wiki answer lol. Though you can see infrared if it is close to the red spectrum and you are sensitive enough, and there is a large amount of ir light available.
You do know you have two types of photoreceptor, rods and cones. The rods which are used for low light sensitivity are not good for color discernment. They are more likely able to pick up the highest frequency of infrared light (within the 750 range) which will appear black and white.
Black and white appear black and white. Infrared would appear a color that we have no word for, because if we were able to see the color or shade, then we would be able to see infrared.
That's a stupid and pointless tip. Not only is the concept completely obvious, but in practice, it doesn't even help, because a remote running out of power will still receive button presses and will still transmit infrared. It just won't have enough juice to reach the receiver. You'll still see the white light even in a dying remote.
i can see IR light with my naked eyes its just very faint. :)
TheMr360elite 3 months ago
If I buy an infrared lamp for my camcorder would I be able to see in the night with it?
DarthOblivius 4 months ago
Cool :D
HystricLaughingHyena 7 months ago
Lol SW music ftw
j25727lego 1 year ago
Chuck Norris sees both infrared and ultraviolet light.
Awesomeness1I 1 year ago 6
@Awesomeness1I stfu bout chuk norriss fagget ass
Brandon77800 9 months ago
@Brandon77800 wow, 6 months since i made that comment because video researching of my science project which i got an A+ on. other then that...
THANKS FOR THE FEEDBACK :PPP
PS- also, i dont even remember making the comment itself, i was surprised when i saw it again. ^_^
Awesomeness1I 9 months ago
we'll have to agree to disagree on this
BibFortuna4President 1 year ago
what some people dont understand is that is visible light that is everything we see is part of the elctromagnetic spectrum and that is also true of infra red (used in almost every commercial remote control for appliances) the only difference from you seeing a beautiful morning waking up in miami or australia and your remote control is the frequency our eyes arent tuned to that frequency so we dont see it the camera on this video was designed to recognise these frequencies so it could see
voiceofreason2008 1 year ago 4
@voiceofreason2008 Well Said!
mrsciguy 1 year ago
@voiceofreason2008 actually every ccd sensor is sensitive to near IR up to 900 something nanometers. Some cameras have an IR filter so the IR doesn't mess up the colors. Nightshot cameras obviously don't have one, and they're sensitivity is further increased.
mrkiky 1 year ago
name of the song ???
p4n0sgr 1 year ago
@p4n0sgr Isao Tomita - Star Wars: Main Title
speezguy 1 year ago
You can also detect the emissions from a remote control using an AM radio.
denelson83 1 year ago
cameras can pickup things wat eyes can't like red eyes, night vision and much other things
dmc081 2 years ago
Wow, there sure are some smarty smart people commenting on here. It's amazing what we've all learned from these Ginormous brains. Better watch what you upload on to you tube or they'll come along and make you feel soooo foolish.
However, we are all very lucky to have been born at the same time as these Gargantuan brainy titans and witness their superior logic!
surfmcgoogler 2 years ago
i see infrared. don't need cam :)
batvanio 3 years ago
You aren't seeing infrared. You're seeing the white light which your camera's photocell interprets infrared as. Even if your camera recorded genuine infrared, it would still be invisible to you, because you lack the photoreceptors necessary to see it.
Please take a science class.
TheNilvarg 3 years ago
look out everyone. an science expert is here.
corb9191 3 years ago
and by the way, that is infrared light, or radio. the camera shows it as visible light though
corb9191 3 years ago
That's exactly what I said. Thank you for proving my point.
TheNilvarg 3 years ago
you are right, of course...some cameras show IR as green though.
VideyoJunkei 3 years ago
How is that any different? It's still receiving infrared and displaying visible light on the display regardless.
I could make a camera that displays gamma rays as shit brown if I wanted to. That's still the same concept, and you're still not seeing invisible energy.
TheNilvarg 3 years ago
They make the color of the visual green, because it enhances the contrast in the shot, and green light produces less eye strain then any other color.
Bigfootnate 2 years ago
there are very very many other colors the human eye cant see.. and i want to see them =[
jimmytheg973 3 years ago
True, and they're all colors that we can't even comprehend. Everything we have ever seen has been a mixture of colors within the visible spectrum. If we were to see anything super- or sub-visible, they would be completely indescribable; although, if they fit the pattern of visible light, Infrared would be Red combined with "sub-visible color" and Ultraviolet would be Violet combined with "super-visible color". But anything past that would be unfamiliar.
TheNilvarg 3 years ago
you killed it
MegadethEternally 3 years ago
I think those 'invisible' colours might follow the same old familiar looking '7 colour rainbow' 'octave' pattern, just at lower or higher vibrations. Where our visible spectrum ends at violet, red might begin again, just a higher frequency version of it. A clue to this is just looking at the colour violet itself; by logic the colour red is the most suitable colour that violet could adjacently naturally blend into. Like octaves in music, just the same old set of tones played at different pitches.
BibFortuna4President 1 year ago
@BibFortuna4President nothing logic about it, they are just perceptions. Realistically , the only thing that differentiates them is wavelength. That is turned into a signal by our eyes, then out brain associates that with colors. The invisible colors just don't look like anything. Musical notes are a whole different thing. You can obtain one from the other by multiplying the number of hertz with the 12th order root of 2 for a half step.
mrkiky 1 year ago
@mrkiky I agree about how the brain translates frequency, but your 'statement' that there's no logical pattern is only an assumption. It doesn't prove of disprove whether it is or it isn't. Musical notes are an audible representation of frequency, so in that respect they are not a whole different thing; on the contrary, they are representing the same thing that light as made from (frequency).
BibFortuna4President 1 year ago
@BibFortuna4President I agree that they are similar in some ways, but quite different in others.In the visible spectrum there is no harmony following a mathematical relation between colors. Also the closest thing you would end up with by trying to split the sound spectrum into "colors" would probably be bass, middle and treble.You can't compare the rainbow to an octave.And there is no logical pattern, it's all about perception.We can't imagine another color just like we can't another dimention.
mrkiky 1 year ago
Hahaha, it really says a lot about how fucking stupid people have gotten, when I present logical scientific fact, and you idiots vote my comment down because you're all too fucking white trashy and useless to appreciate the value of an education.
TheNilvarg 3 years ago
Actually you can see infrared light, but only if it was in high concentrated levels. You can use exposed film placed over goggles to filter out any visible light to do this, though you have to go out in daylight in order for you to see anything as there is a larger concentration of infrared light for you to pick up on. The only problem is your eye does not react to infrared light as it does visible light and you could risk retinal damage lol.
Bigfootnate 2 years ago
No, you can't. None of these anecdotal tricks people mention involve you actually seeing Infrared. They simply involve seeing the effects infrared has on certain materials and technologies. We simply lack the receptors to perceive the wavelength.
It's like the fact that nothing can ever possibly see an atom itself, although for different reasons. We can use tools to generate an image of the electrorepulsive field its charge generates, but we are simply incapable of seeing it.
TheNilvarg 2 years ago
If the only thing coming through a filtered goggle is IR light then you are seeing IR. The fact remains that exposed film layered together filters out all visible light except for IR, which can also be utilized to make IR lights out of spot lights though they do get hot after a short amount of time. The fact remains in high enough levels IR light will stimulate a visual response. If all visible light is filtered out.
Bigfootnate 2 years ago
The S cones have peak sensitivity at 564580 nm, but it's a bell curve, so there is still some sensitivity even down to 700 or 750 nm. Near infrared nominally starts at 750 nm, so pick the shortest wavelength you are willing to call infrared, and make the light intense enough, and you'll find people able to see it.
The Wiki answer lol. Though you can see infrared if it is close to the red spectrum and you are sensitive enough, and there is a large amount of ir light available.
Bigfootnate 2 years ago
Really? Tell me what color Infrared is. Go for it.
TheNilvarg 2 years ago 2
You do know you have two types of photoreceptor, rods and cones. The rods which are used for low light sensitivity are not good for color discernment. They are more likely able to pick up the highest frequency of infrared light (within the 750 range) which will appear black and white.
Bigfootnate 2 years ago
Black and white appear black and white. Infrared would appear a color that we have no word for, because if we were able to see the color or shade, then we would be able to see infrared.
TheNilvarg 2 years ago
Comment removed
Dirtfire 1 year ago
@TheNilvarg Ummm black??
TimpBizkit 1 year ago
Comment removed
IRONnugget09 1 year ago
HESE THE BEST TEACHER ANYONE COULD EVER HAVE. YOU GUYS SHUD BE JEALUs
hockeyguy2394 3 years ago
You seem to need a teacher.
xpopxkidx110 3 years ago
Or a lobotomy.
TheNilvarg 3 years ago
LMFAO!
xpopxkidx110 3 years ago
To check a remote controler.
Hold it in front off a camera.
(mobile phone)
Than you can see the blinking.
Walla
arjunus 3 years ago
That's a stupid and pointless tip. Not only is the concept completely obvious, but in practice, it doesn't even help, because a remote running out of power will still receive button presses and will still transmit infrared. It just won't have enough juice to reach the receiver. You'll still see the white light even in a dying remote.
Lame. And it's "voila" - not "walla".
TheNilvarg 3 years ago
awesome!!!!
WaCiesT 3 years ago
I found this out while recording the wii's sensor bar, and u can use it to see in the dark if u have a string FLIR light.
dinmagic 4 years ago
songtheme
i want it!
davidsaga06 4 years ago
Awesome. I always wondered if that were true, but I never got around to trying it.
cptmc 4 years ago
Cool
Oblivions12221 4 years ago