[HN Gopher] Cameras and Lenses (2020)
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Cameras and Lenses (2020)
        
       Author : sebg
       Score  : 302 points
       Date   : 2026-01-01 17:18 UTC (5 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (ciechanow.ski)
 (TXT) w3m dump (ciechanow.ski)
        
       | Fiveplus wrote:
       | Every time I come across one of Bartosz posts, I drop everything
       | to read it. And I learn so much.
       | 
       | The way he builds up the mental model from a simple photon bucket
       | to a pinhole and finally to a lens system is just incredible. I
       | particularly loved the section on the circle of confusion. I've
       | read dozens of explanations on depth of field, but being able to
       | interactively drag the aperture slider and see exactly how the
       | cone of light narrows and the blur reduces makes it click in a
       | way that static text never could. This really should be the
       | standard for digital textbooks.
        
       | Y_Y wrote:
       | Amazing as usual.
       | 
       | I am always on the lookout for the classic sin of making it look
       | like electromagnetic waves wiggle in space like a snake. I know
       | it's convenient to glue the tangent space to the underlying
       | physical space, but I think it confuses students.
       | 
       | To be clear: the amplitude of the electric and magnetic fields
       | (and hence their components in each direction) oscillate in
       | space/time. Any particular wave though should travel in a
       | straight line (usual caveats apply). Of course you may
       | incidentally also get e.g. sinusoidal variations in intesity
       | perpendicular to the wavevector, but that will be because of the
       | overall beam characteristics.
       | 
       | I don't mean to say I know a better way to show this, and I am
       | aware of many complicating factors. I just think lots of people
       | (my former students and self included) can come away with a wrong
       | idea about how these waves work.
        
         | mal10c wrote:
         | I agree with your thought process. Factoring in antenna type
         | and reflections also causes difficulties when explaining
         | concepts like super position. The sinusoid is a good
         | illustration of what a given receiver might detect at some
         | location (X,Y,Z). A more accurate way to show that may be a
         | light source fading on and off to match some frequency (below
         | THz). Then factoring in the speed of light, at time zero, the
         | light will be off, at some arbitrary time 1, the light will be
         | illuminated at 0.25 (scale goes up to 1 here). The light energy
         | peak at time 1 is at the light. Then at time 2, the light goes
         | up to 0.5. That means that the 0.25 light is now 1 unit away
         | from the light while the 0.5 is at the light. Step to time 3
         | and the light goes up to 0.75, meaning 1 unit from the light,
         | the light is at 0.5 and 2 units from the light, the light is
         | dimmer at 0.25. This repeats with the light hitting 1.0 then
         | falling back to 0.75, then 0.5, etc. The movement of light is
         | key and I think that's what is often either misunderstood or
         | just not considered enough.
        
       | behnamoh wrote:
       | Can we donate to creative individuals like the OP so they keep
       | making amazing stuff? This is the kind of output LLMs will not be
       | able to produce any time soon.
        
         | macintux wrote:
         | He has a Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/ciechanowski
        
         | sho_hn wrote:
         | "Make a Bartosz-style website about $topic" seems like a fun
         | benchmark idea. Maybe more so than pelicans on bicycles.
         | 
         | To be honest, though, this seems like ideal content for an LLM
         | to produce. It's basically fact regurgitation.
        
       | andyfilms1 wrote:
       | Doesn't seem to work in Firefox. :(
        
         | uhoh-itsmaciek wrote:
         | FF on Android seems to work fine here. What problem are you
         | seeing?
        
         | mcdonje wrote:
         | Works fine for me with Firefox on Debian. Are you sure you
         | don't have an extension breaking it?
        
         | compiler-guy wrote:
         | Working fine on Firefox for IOS.
        
         | cfraenkel wrote:
         | Also works in Firefox (144.0.2) / MacOS (10.15)
        
         | fsckboy wrote:
         | I use firefox with javascript mostly off (UMatrix) but when I
         | turned it on for fonts.googleapis.com the site and sliders all
         | seem to worke. then I turned it on for gstatic.com
         | fonts.gstatic.com , and not sure if that changed anything else.
         | I'm on linux desktop
        
       | dang wrote:
       | One past thread (only?) - others?
       | 
       |  _Cameras and Lenses_ -
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25357315 - Dec 2020 (213
       | comments)
        
       | ChrisArchitect wrote:
       | (2020)
       | 
       | Some discussion then:
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25357315
        
       | stared wrote:
       | I am amazed by people like Bartosz Ciechanowski and Andrey
       | Karpathy. What would be a lifetime side project for other smart
       | and curious people, they seem to release every quarter. How do
       | they do it?
       | 
       | Most people who are smart and creative are nowhere near as
       | productive. And most people who are extremely productive don't
       | get sidetracked by side projects.
        
       | _jayhack_ wrote:
       | Great article. For another fantastic explainer on optics, see
       | 3Blue1Brown's video on refraction:
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTzGBJPuJwM
        
       | fsckboy wrote:
       | > Pictures have Art has _always been a meaningful part of the
       | human experience. From the first cave drawings, to sketches and
       | paintings, to modern photography, we've mastered the art of
       | recording what we_ see think and feel.
        
         | Sharlin wrote:
         | Your "correction" does not make sense. "Pictures" and "art" are
         | overlapping categories but neither is a subset of the other.
         | Pictures in and of themselves are plenty fascinating to humans,
         | without bringing art into the equation.
        
           | fsckboy wrote:
           | it is your critique that does not make sense. I was not
           | applying any hierarchy or subsetting whatsoever. Inseparable
           | unity would be closer to the point.
           | 
           | I was making the point that the cave painters believed
           | everything including rocks and trees were deeply invested
           | with spiritual power, and they didn't draw a cave painting
           | without investing it with spiritual ideas. Even if one of
           | their goals was to capture an accurate image of some animals,
           | and indicate when in the lunar or solar cycle they were
           | expected to calve, when they went hunting for one a part of
           | the goal would be cut out its heart and eat it raw because of
           | the power contained within, and give thanks to the great
           | mother. Inseparable.
           | 
           | even though I am not spiritual at all, I find your worldview
           | too barren to explain human endeavor.
        
       | fsckboy wrote:
       | Cameras and Lenses and photography has been such a fascinating
       | and open and do-it-yourself tinkering medium for well over a
       | century: when are we going to get to be able to play around with
       | what's inside iPhone, Samsung, and Pixel cameras?
       | 
       | (maybe we already can, I'm simply asking)
        
       | scosman wrote:
       | If anyone hasn't already seen Bartosz's mechanical watch
       | animations, they are also amazing:
       | https://ciechanow.ski/mechanical-watch/
        
       | nntwozz wrote:
       | Bartosz Ciechanowski's blog brings back the joy of surfing the
       | web during the heyday of Adobe Flash (minus the 100% CPU).
       | 
       | It's so much fun manipulating things, exploring and getting
       | surprising feedback.
       | 
       | I know it's not really fair to compare this highly scientific
       | masterpiece to the artistic flash websites of the past, but for
       | me at least it immediately evokes the same feelings.
        
         | zbendefy wrote:
         | Tangential, but Flash had a nice side effect that the "app"
         | could be exported in a self contained way via SWF.
         | 
         | Exporting this site for example in a future proof way is not
         | that obvious. (Exporting as pdf wont work with the webgl
         | applets, exporting the html page might work but is error prone
         | depending in the website structure)
         | 
         | 50 years from now, flash emulators will still work on swf
         | files, but these sites might be lost. Or is there a way to
         | archive sites like this?
        
       | plagiarist wrote:
       | What a fantastic article!
       | 
       | Makes me wish for a similar resource that would teach 3+ element
       | optics, moving elements, and sortof get closer to modern lens
       | design.
        
       | brcmthrowaway wrote:
       | Does anyone know of a lens that can make a laser look like a
       | spotlight?
        
         | aj7 wrote:
         | Look up "beam expanding telescope."
        
       | pontussw wrote:
       | This is so incredibly well done
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2026-01-01 23:00 UTC)