Top
Best
New

Posted by sebg 1/1/2026

Cameras and Lenses (2020)(ciechanow.ski)
549 points | 57 comments
nntwozz 1/1/2026|
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 1/1/2026|
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?

KPGv2 1/1/2026|||
> Or is there a way to archive sites like this?

A couple days ago, someone published their archive of HN that works in any browser.

Archiving sites is easy anyway. I wrote a Scrapy app that archives everything within the a specific fandom on Ao3. TH hardest part is remembering how beautiful soup queries work.

roywiggins 1/1/2026||
Static sites are straightforward, yeah. Highly dynamic websites like this one commonly explode when you archive them naively.
sneak 1/2/2026|||
There is nothing dynamic about this site in the sense of “static site”. This may well be a static site.
roywiggins 1/2/2026|||
Wikipedia, at least, uses the same terminology as me:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_web_page?wprov=sfla1

> A client-side dynamic web page processes the web page using JavaScript running in the browser as it loads.

The linked page is one of those. They're often harder to scrape than server-side rendered webforums and the like.

lossyalgo 1/2/2026|||
I tried several "static site download" plugins such as SingleFile for FireFox and none of the sliders work :(
mrkstu 1/2/2026|||
Server side rendered sites that are dynamic in nature- you'll only get a literal snapshot of state you happen to be in...
roywiggins 1/2/2026||
I mean highly dynamic, entirely frontend sites like these are hard to archive, since you have to really preserve every bit of JavaScript dependency, including any dynamically loaded dependencies, and rewire everything to work again.

And then hope that whatever browser features you rely on aren't removed in 20 years. Flash applets from 20 years ago are usually more self-contained and Just Work if you have a functioning runtime (either the official one or Ruffle)

pava0 1/2/2026||||
I strongly suggest you try (the selfhosted version of) Browsertrix from Webrecorder, it's really well done, actively delevoped and can export the website as .wacz without problem.
KPGv2 1/2/2026|||
> 50 years from now, flash emulators will still work on swf files

I'm not sure 50 years from now there will be flash emulators. Who is going to write on for the XP3.12345235 Fruity Ununpentium Silicon x256^2 neuralink devices.

Didn't Flash die because iPhones weren't going to support it? So one of the major OSes people spend most of their lives on can't even run SFW files. Can Android? I've honestly never tried.

But web standards persist.

sneak 1/2/2026|||
50 years from now there will be emulators that can run the OSes of today that can run flash emulators.
lossyalgo 1/2/2026||
Assuming RAM and GPU prices come down again so that we can afford to buy our own hardware instead of running everything in the cloud, which forbids "nefarious" software. /s?

Edit: Steve from Gamer's Nexus basically agrees: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NHO9UtvTPSA

roywiggins 1/2/2026|||
Ruffle, the Flash runtime emulator, does run in the browser.
scosman 1/1/2026||
If anyone hasn't already seen Bartosz's mechanical watch animations, they are also amazing: https://ciechanow.ski/mechanical-watch/
Y_Y 1/1/2026||
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 1/1/2026|
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.
tylerneylon 1/2/2026||
In case anyone is curious about _why_ light bends when it enters a lens:

First, light apparently slows down in some materials because the photons are constantly interacting with electrons, and these interactions create secondary waves that are slightly out of phase with the original light. The end result is a modified wave that effectively travels more slowly. So light going in a straight line through air travels more quickly than light going through a lens.

Second, getting more into quantum physics, light typically follows the shortest path from one point to another because that path tends to provide the most constructive interference between different possible routes. (The "why" of this is more involved; Feynman's book QED gives a good intro.)

Third, if you imagine a lifeguard running to rescue someone in the ocean, then they will take the fastest path, which is not directly toward the person in the ocean. Rather, they will run a bit more on the beach in order to have to swim less because travel through the water is slower. The end result is piecewise linear = two straight lines of travel, with a bend at the water line.

To summarize, you can ask "_why_ does light bend going into and out of lenses?" and the answer involves seeing light no longer as a particle but as a wave function (the quantum perspective), and then taking advantage of that wave function's tendency to prefer fastest-travel paths, and then noticing that the apparent bend is in fact the path of fastest travel.

dang 1/1/2026||
One past thread (only?) - others?

Cameras and Lenses - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25357315 - Dec 2020 (213 comments)

fsckboy 1/1/2026||
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)

plasticeagle 1/1/2026||
Incredible. Not a whiff of AI (I mean, obviously I see now because it's from 2020). Just fantastic to see clear and elegant writing again.
o10449366 1/2/2026|
Comments on AI, on an article which has nothing to do with it, are just as uninspired as AI writing.
stared 1/1/2026||
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.

i_am_a_peasant 1/2/2026||
tbh i think they just don’t procrastinate and do stuff
fsckboy 1/1/2026||
[flagged]
Fiveplus 1/1/2026||
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.

plagiarist 1/1/2026|
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.

More comments...