The makers of PhotoBlocker spray claim that their product will make your license plate invisible to photo radar, red light cameras, and infrared and laster cameras. Special crystals in the spray will reflect back the flash (or light source) used by these cameras, making your license look like a bright blur. Would this actually work? Would it be legal if it did? They say that the spray is invisible to the naked eye, which means that it won't be of much use if a cop pulls you over. Personally, I've always thought someone should make a stealth car, made out of the same material as the stealth airplanes. That would be cool. (via Red Ferret)
Comments
"Alex,
This is what I got from the website. If it doesn't work for you, all I can say is you or your car plate must be special."
OK, again, I'M NOT ALEX! No harm, no foul, but I DID tell you that once already.
I'll ask you again: how is it possible for a spray to change the physical nature of light waves so that they are visible to the human eye but NOT visible to a camera? Please don't tell me it's some kind of special super-magical technology. Tell me WHAT kind of special super-magical technology it is, if you can. I don't believe that there is any such substance that can do that under normal real world conditions. We know that the plates must be visible to the human eye or the police would be pulling users of the spray over all the time for not having legible plates.
Generally speaking, if you can see it, you can photograph it. As I've also said recently, if you think it has something to do with the angle at which the camera is observing the license plate, why don't you just get a ladder and try to duplicate it? I'm guessing that you'll see (and photograph) the license plate just fine.
Before you suggest that *I* conduct this test instead of you, let me point out that YOU are the one making the extraordinary claim so the burden of proof is on YOU. The seeming physical impossibility of what is claimed for the spray combined with my having seen a guy who sells it saying on TV that the stuff doesn't work causes me to call "bullshit" on this one.
sorry, I see alex is the moderator who sends the notification e-mails. Anyways, before u get real cranky, I went to the website to copy 'how it works'. I think they should pay me! here it is:
How does PhotoBlocker Spray work?
A majority of red light & speed cameras utilize a strong flash to photograph the license plate on your car. Once sprayed on your license plate, PhotoBlocker
"Once sprayed on your license plate, PhotoBlocker
I hope you are not as skeptical about matters in life!
From what I understand, the red light cameras utilize a STRONG FLASH...that's why some ppl try it with ordinary cameras and cry 'it doesn't workkk!' There were cases, I saw it on TV, (don't remember what station it was)where it even worked with some cameras. In those cases, I believe those particular cameras must have flash as strong, or at least nearly as strong, as that of red light and speed cameras. Believe me, I had to bombard them with questions and check all the links with Tv recordings about photoblocker spray before I let go of my $29.99. That was one of the best products I have bought. If you are still not convinced, wait until I sell my car and I'll give you my plates (you know that once you spray it, the spray works for life...not a bad deal..huh?) Anyway, I'll post you a link for the Tv recordings if I can get one.
"Cranky media,
I hope you are not as skeptical about matters in life!"
Actually, yes, I AM that skeptical about matters in life. Unfortunately, there are many people who want to separate you from your money via various means.
"From what I understand, the red light cameras utilize a STRONG FLASH...that's why some ppl try it with ordinary cameras and cry 'it doesn't workkk!"
That seems dubious to me. How strong could the traffic camera flashes be? Also, remember that traffic cameras operate during daylight hours as well. The flash wouldn't be much of a factor (or not a factor at all) during daylight, right? So the spray shouldn't make any difference when the sun is out at all. Any spray that could block a camera during daylight would also keep the human eye from seeing the license plate, which would get you a fine, also.
I'm just not buying this whole thing (but I've said that before, haven't I?)
According to this PDF (admittedly very localised in coverage) of all the wattages listed, only one wasn't using a 250 watt flash, but rather a 500 watt flash. Other reports and sites support the idea that most flash bulbs used seem to be far less than the 400 watt minimum needed to trigger Photoblocker. And that's only for those cameras that that use a visible flash. Many use an infrared flash to avoid blinding drivers, which might still be blocked. I haven't bothered to check their claims.
As for cranky media guy, I still keep my word...I'll give you my plates when I sell my car. Then your job will be to confirm/or Not whether PB's claim that once sprayed stays forever. Deal?
However, even if it does, it's not going to be brighter than the sun on a clear day. If the sun can't cause too much glare, how is the (probably) sub-400 watt bulb going to do it?
and ofcourse Cranky,
let me just say this..u guys r making a big fuss over this. Maybe u graduated in physics 😊 IT DOES WORK! If it worked for me in two different occasions, y wouldn't it work for others...or am I a special case, along with other special cases such as ...Wall Street Journal, The LA Times, The Mail (U.K), Washington Times, The new York Times, Fox News (Colorado, N.J., N.Y...) ?? Come on now...get real.
"Then your job will be to confirm/or Not whether PB's claim that once sprayed stays forever. Deal?"
Nope. In most cases, it isn't possible to prove a negative. That's why the burden of proof is on the person who makes an extraordinary claim. That would be YOU, nidia. In other words, it's YOUR job to eliminate all the other reasons that you may not have gotten a ticket when there was a traffic camera present. Once you have done that, THEN you can begin to attempt to prove that this spray works. Ball's in your court, nidia.
"IT DOES WORK! If it worked for me in two different occasions, y wouldn't it work for others..."
How do you know for certain that the spray worked for you? Can you completely factor out every other possibility? You cite several sources; did THEY say that they factored out every other possibility...or did they say something like, "The spray SEEMED to work" or "Users swear by the spray"?
Did they even bother to factor out the other possibilities at all?
Nooooo! lol! what they did was not check whether the drivers got ticket. What Fox News did was..got together with Denver Police and test whether the product work. They drove over the speed limit triggering the speed camera. As expected, the speed camera took picture. Then the police checked the pictures...and guess what? the picture was overexposed and the tag unreadable.
By the way, the Trading Standards Officials in England fined a guy who was selling a product called Safeplate. The guy was also selling Photoblocker...but guess what? the only product he was fined was the safeplate (the counterfeit) because they find that it didn't do what it said on the tin. But the Photoblocker, with all the independent tests and results, was found -YET AGAIN - to work! So, for those who think Photoblocker is just another hair spray..learn from Safeplate.huhu!
here is the video I promised you. Now, I arrest my case....satisfied? You still have my plates (when I sell my car ofcourse) to look forward to. enjoy:
http://www.phantomplate.com/vidpop_kxan.html
http://real.phantomplate.com:8080/ramgen/~phantomplate/foxnews-denver-dsl.rm
http://www.phantomplate.com/vidpop_kxan.html
Weekend, Sep 30 - Oct 1, 2006
Copyright
Thanks especially for talking about "negative proofs." That's something that can't be repeated often enough, as I've found out from debating various people on this website.
I'm still not entirely convinced of the usefulness of license plate sprays, especially since I saw a guy who distributes the stuff say on KPTV, Channel 12 in Portland, that it doesn't work, but I'm a *little* bit more open to the possibility than I was.
The angle of incidence is critical; the spray is supposed to work by reflecting all of the light back emitted from the source area back to the source area, the plate will still be perfectly readable except for when viewed in line with the flash. These sprays can work (especially against digital type cameras) but like you I
"I
Copyright
"something other than obvious dirt obscured the license plate."
.....and? So what? Was that bloke shown the original enforcement film photos (assuming he as seen photos at all) or a digital copy of them? If the latter it means nothing - just like ALL the photos you see on the internet!!!
A quick Google:
"Officials say illegible licence plates show up on anything from 10% to 40% of photos, with snow, dirt or turning vehicles accounting for most of the failure."
http://www.phantomplate.com/lo_pressrelease.asp?pressname=nationalpost
Try again!
http://www.stopphotocops.com/howitworks.html
Look at the demonstration photo of the car without and
as in Britain, it'd be illegeal to use photoblocker spray in any other country...BUT ONLY IF they could tell who is using it....they Can't! It is a clear spray that cannot be detected by the naked eye. If you don't want to get traffic/red light camera tickets (protect yourself), use it. I don't use it to run red light...but believe me I'm not the only one who's gotten a ticket for driving through a yello....many have got tickets for making a legal right turn.
And, Cranky,I have yet to see the guy who sells the product and supposedly said it didn't work. Searched over and over again...I guess only you could watch it..hehehe:)
"And, Cranky,I have yet to see the guy who sells the product and supposedly said it didn't work. Searched over and over again...I guess only you could watch it..hehehe"
Nidia, you have my word that I really did see that. I can tell you the station I saw it on: KPTV, Channel 12 in Portland, Oregon.
Their website is kptv.com; they may or may not still have that video in their archives. I'm not exactly sure when I saw that story. It was possibly last year. The guy was described as a distributor of license plate spray and he said on camera that the stuff didn't work. Make of that what you will.
Smeggy, what do they call you at the police station? lol!
"cranky...I checked again and again..no archive has it. What were you drinking when you watched it?"
Well, nothing. I don't drink or do recreational drugs of any kind, so I wasn't high when I saw that story. I DID see it on KPTV. I wish I had an exact date for when the story ran; that would help us find it. Most likely, the story did not originate at KPTV; they use a lot of stories from other stations on their news,
It's clear that I'm no longer needed here if that's the best response you have.
How do you KNOW the product works?
Sooooo, Photoblocker remains the one and only spray that hides your plates from traffic/redlight cameras...saving you hundreds of dollars in fine.
I know it has saved me hundreds in fines...and have only praise for the product!
"If you think about it, why would States bother to ban the spray if it doesn't work? They ban it because Photoblocker spray is causing them to lose tens of thousands of dollars in revenue."
Nidia, it's banned in some states because the legislators there want to prevent people from circumventing the law. They don't have testing labs; they just know that the product claims to be able to keep cops from reading your license plate so they make it illegal to try to do that. The spray may or may not work but the fact that lawmakers ban it isn't proof that it does.
now we r getting rude...you said,"The rest of your post is garbage! " because you don't like it? grow up! First of all, I found out most of the info. on Photoblocker after I started posting comments here. When I bought the product, I read a few newspaper articles on their website and I was convinced it works. I mean, why would all those newspapers and Tv stations agree the product work? You said "...strongly suggests you have an interest in it" Now you mention it, I should ask the company if they have plan to become public...I'll be the first to buy shares.
I have praise for Photoblocker only because (I don't know how many more companies sell similar products)the other one I know -Safeplate, which is manufactured in the U.K - does not work and was fined by the trading standard for selling a product which doesn't do what it says on the tin. it was on newspaper.
Regarding states banning Photoblocker, you said "....is more practical banning anything marketed as such." Hey, that's what you say...BUT what I wrote was not my opinion....it was what the legislator admitted..that it was costing them in revenue. Read earlier posts to see the newspaper articles.
It doesn't cost all that much and ignoring personal intent (everybody's got a reason to want the spray), I really want to get the stuff if it works just once!
If there are dummy speed cameras or cameras that have been turned off... then me, my family and our friends must be incredibly unlucky.
Ok, so there are for and against here. I just want to fight back - I'm sick and tired of constantly worrying about my speed, passing through 3 different speed limits within half a mile in some places. This is where I have mostly been caught, doing 14km over a 40km limit or 11km over a 60km limit.
It strikes me as being over the top. If I'm not able to see a speed limit change then sure that's my problem. I have issues with a 40km zone. To me that's a slow zone for obvious safety reasons and it should be sign-posted clearly, not almost hidden where a new comer to the area won't see it coming in at 60km.
There are a lot of us who do not go around ignoring the laws, we try to keep in line but geez the cameras take the cake.
So my rant is all about the so-called effectiveness of speed cameras. I do hate detest and whine at rules and regulations that try to supposedly "protect" the people when the playing field is not level. The guy in a Nissan who sped past me in a 60km zone last week probably has this spray or maybe he's lucky enough the cameras are turned off where ever he goes. His kind does this every bloody Friday night on a strip of road here in the City.
To tell the truth, I want to believe that this spray is going to work sometimes. It's not expensive and it's not illegal as long as my plates are visible to the human eye.
Cranky and Steve, I appreciate your opinion and logic.
Nidia I also appreciate your input too.
My eyes are open now and I'm just going to buy it, what the heck, I spend more on a night out.
Hell yes!
I completely and utterly agree with you. This is one device for which claims of their effectiveness have been proven to be total bull. It also negatively impacts on long-term driver attitude and skill set.
Safespeed.org.uk is leading the UK fight against speed cameras and their usage (is often quite in the UK media in related TV programs and articles). Have a look around in there and say hi to me on their forums (I use the same nick).
"My eyes are open now and I'm just going to buy it, what the heck, I spend more on a night out."
There is no harm in it - apart from the fact it
"There is no harm in it - apart from the fact it
YOU SIR ARE A MORAN. THAT STORY WAS ON A PRODUCT CALLED Photo stopper NOT PhotoBlocker. A totally different product and I might say a cheap imitation. How dare you post such total rubbish and misinform all of us. Who are you? probably a cop, politician or a camera vendor? Whoever you are the truth is out there and people will find it. The guy in the Oregon story you are referring to is an idiot who got in trouble for selling fake Photoblockers called Photo stopper. I should know because I got burrend when I both the fake stuff. Luckily when I contacted the makers of Photoblocker they were kind enough to give me a can of their "real" stuff. All they wanted in return was to track down the counterfeiters.
For all you skeptics out there check out YouTube. The proof is out there. You decide...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_bwH53kBdA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oKUT3Ls8bZY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iq7DIPalznk
I use it and i know, the gut pussing Ontrack ....i have seen your posts on the net, same wording and all.
If you want to by a COVER then go to ontrack....but you WILL get pulled over by cops!!!!!!!!
if you want to be stelth then get the spray!!!!
I got mine in CANADA at http:\\www.photoblockercanada.com
The reason i seen all your posts is i was doing more homework on the stuff....i GOOGLED photoblocker wiht the word scam and hoaxs guess what nothing!
When photoblocker saves you ONE ticket it payed for itself.
Ontrack sells the knock off Photostoper. and photo fog.
I dont thinking speeding is right butI HATE BIG BROTHER.
YOU are right Mat.. Ontrack is just jelous of PhantomPlate. Sorry ass losers and cheats...Thanks for selling me the fake photoblocker you call photo stopper. What needs to be done is stop you.
thanks for making it clear for us...all the time when Smeggy goes on about KPTV showing a photoblocker seller who admitted that photoblocker didn't work,(but wouldn't send me the link) I was wondering what it could have been! I knew it couldn't have been Photoblocker..because if it worked for me (and luck usually ain't on my side), I saw no reason why it wouldn't work for another.
Photo stopper ain't the only fake spray...there's also another one they sold in England > Safeplate. And try getting your money back after getting a ticket, and you would see what they are really about. The nice, polite, "you have made the right decision by protecting yourself with Safeplate" turns into " there is no gurantee it works everytime"...take that with a stinking attitude, and you have safeplate.