US Army wants 2.3 gigapixel camera for aerial surveillance

DARPA may have already gone to the trouble of building a 1.8 gigapixel camera as part of its ARGUS-IS project (pictured above), but it looks like the US Army is setting its sights a little higher, and it's now soliciting proposals for a 2.3 gigapixel camera that would be used for some super-wide aerial surveillance. While obviously still quite a ways from becoming reality, the Army hopes the system will be both smaller and lighter than previous systems, work in the infrared range to boot, and capture images at a rate of two frames per second. The key bit, however, is of course that 2.3 gigapixel sensor, which should let the camera provide continuous coverage of a range of about sixty-two square miles at a resolution of 0.3 meters, or just enough to make out the outline of your tinfoil hat.

[Heywatchitbuddy Posted Aug 20th 2009 5:39PM]

1.21 gigapixels?!!?

[Jacob1 Posted Aug 20th 2009 5:45PM]

Great Scott!

[(Unverified) Posted Aug 20th 2009 5:51PM]

omg doc you're still alive

[DRHouse Posted Aug 20th 2009 6:08PM]

I want Terra Pixel for my mobile camera

[iEye the great Posted Aug 20th 2009 6:54PM]

Dont matter, I bet the lens will be crap and no autofocus!

ZING!

[AvianAzn Posted Aug 20th 2009 11:13PM]

http://lifeinmegapixels.com/fullscreen.php?location=bath

1.3 gigapixels

[RioRyan Posted Aug 21st 2009 12:41AM]

I've got just what they need!
http://img34.imageshack.us/img34/7595/00029910.jpg

[Eugene Action Posted Jan 1st 2010 1:23PM]

@RioRyan nayyy... THIS http://farm1.static.flickr.com/51/143757826_3307362f31.jpg?v=0

[crimrOw Posted Mar 29th 2010 1:03PM]

@Heywatchitbuddy Where we're going, we don't need film.

[KR Posted Aug 20th 2009 5:40PM]

DANG.... and people are wishing for a iPhone camera thats higher then 4 Megapixels....

the us army sure does have high expectations...

[Raul7 Posted Aug 20th 2009 5:44PM]

Yes, because more megapixels in the iPhone will sure make the camera much better...

[(Unverified) Posted Aug 20th 2009 6:04PM]

A giant taco.

[Streetfights Posted Aug 20th 2009 6:27PM]

He was just waiting for an excuse to find out what a vagina looks like

[Eternal Density Posted Aug 20th 2009 7:08PM]

How is babby formed with 2.3 gigapixels?

[Snoweman Posted Aug 20th 2009 5:42PM]

62 square miles on 2.3 megapixels? Something ain't right.

[KR Posted Aug 20th 2009 5:43PM]

GIGApixels

[PhoenixFox Posted Aug 20th 2009 5:43PM]

The story said megapixels the second time, it needs to be changed.

Someone ain't used to saying gigapixels :P

[(Unverified) Posted Aug 20th 2009 6:59PM]

actually, the camera would have a series of sensors at 2.3 each. with enough, you'd have a camera capable of 2.3 gigapixel images.

[(Unverified) Posted Nov 23rd 2009 10:08AM]

Thats GIGApixels.....

[(Unverified) Posted Aug 20th 2009 5:43PM]

"The key bit, however, is of course that 2.3 megapixel sensor"

Should be giga :)

[benblake112 Posted Aug 20th 2009 5:43PM]

Ditto :-)

[Taylor Yes Taylor Posted Aug 20th 2009 6:13PM]

Tritto.

Or... Uh, something.
-Taylor

[Sibuna Posted Aug 20th 2009 8:46PM]

Gigady gigady..

[(Unverified) Posted Aug 20th 2009 5:44PM]

2.3 megapixel sensor on a 2.3 gigapixel camera. Read your articles before posting them engadget people.

[scratchfury Posted Aug 20th 2009 6:07PM]

That will never happen.

[garrenteed Posted Aug 20th 2009 6:32PM]

@Joseph
I almost roasted you for your comment, thinking you meant that a 2.3 gigapixel camera will never happen. boom, close to being roasted.

[Trexx Posted May 15th 2010 1:05PM]

@scratchfury

Yeah, and 640Kb is all the memory anyone will ever need.

"That will never happen"... famous last words.

[MarcusMaximus Posted Aug 20th 2009 5:47PM]

What kind of memory/busses/etc are they using that can handle that much data that fast?

[monkey with glasses Posted Aug 20th 2009 6:03PM]

was asking myself the same question. must be a NASA processer.

[AFarzin Posted Aug 20th 2009 5:48PM]

*Dr. Evil Voice:*

I want infinity BILLION pixels!

[SEscobedo Posted Mar 17th 2010 11:18PM]

@(Unverified)

And all I wanted was frickin sharks with frickin lasers on them.

[AvianAzn Posted Aug 20th 2009 11:00PM]

yay w8 for terapixels

[MarcusMaximus Posted Aug 20th 2009 6:01PM]

Well eventually they're bound to hit the point where the sensor for each pixel would have to be smaller than the wavelengths of visible light and making any more just won't help. That or the cameras will have to be friggin' ginormous

[Zakk Posted Aug 20th 2009 5:51PM]

Tin foil hat..Pah! The more high tech they go the lower I go..My hat is now made of soil and grass..

[DirtyVegas Posted Aug 20th 2009 5:51PM]

Want someone to start complaining that simply upping the number of pixels won't help.

[RMN Posted Aug 20th 2009 9:07PM]

Simply upping the number of pixels wont help. Nothing but a marketing trick to fool terrorists who don't know any better.

[kevout Posted Aug 20th 2009 5:53PM]

"The key bit, however, is of course that 2.3 megapixel sensor"

Or rather, the scores of them that need to be taped together to get the total resolution up to 2.3 gigapixels.

[WindSlash Posted Aug 20th 2009 6:04PM]

Now they just need a 35964p (33.3 x 1080p) TV monitor with 3D support at base, so they can shoot and watch XXXXXXXXHD p0rn!

Life is good.

[monkey with glasses Posted Aug 20th 2009 6:08PM]

Place on the ceiling.

[x181 Posted Aug 20th 2009 6:05PM]

OVER 9000 (gigapixels)

[Poop Chef Posted Aug 21st 2009 12:44AM]

I emphatically disagree with your misleading rhetoric.

[(Unverified) Posted Aug 20th 2009 6:10PM]

WTF does the Army want with arial survellience? They couldn't even get the FCS to work right!

Hey Army, stick to kicking in doors and let the pros (USAF) handle UAV technology, K?

[antoinebugleboy Posted Aug 20th 2009 6:10PM]

There is a rap-gangsta related joke I want to make here, but it would probably get me banned.

[PSIREX Posted Aug 20th 2009 9:14PM]

OH come on! tell it already...

[jellotime91 Posted Aug 20th 2009 6:10PM]

In 20 years this will be in the iPhone and it still won't be enough for the haters. LOL

[MarcusMaximus Posted Aug 20th 2009 6:30PM]

You make no sense.

[AvianAzn Posted Aug 20th 2009 11:05PM]

u have the same name as i do

and why do i always have to confirm and type in my email + password, cant i just login?

[(Unverified) Posted Aug 20th 2009 6:18PM]

Ack! Just when we thought the megapixel race was over, they start the gigapixel race!

[(Unverified) Posted Aug 20th 2009 6:22PM]

Wouldn't a Film-based surveillance camera still provide more Gigapixel goodness? I was told that despite digital photography's advances - we're still not yet able to match the Gigapixel equivalent that you can get with film.
From Wikipedia:

" Many professional-quality film cameras use medium format or large format films. Because of the size of the imaging area, they have higher resolution than the current top-of-the-range digital cameras. It is estimated that a medium format film image can record around 50 megapixels, while large format films can record around 200 megapixels (4 × 5 inch) which would equate to around 800 megapixels on the largest common film format, 8 × 10 inches "

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_versus_film_photography

But then again, I'm probably wrong since I'm talking about consumer level photography equipment.

[cesium Posted Aug 20th 2009 6:32PM]

There's a very good chance that the images will be sent ASAP to some command location. Can't do that with film ;)