[OneDeuxTriSeiGo]

Depends on the type of LIDAR. LIDAR rated for vehicle use is at a wavelength opaque to the eyes so it hits the surface and fluid of your eye and reflects back rather than going through to your cones and rods.

It isn't however opaque for optical glass (since the LIDAR has to shine through optical glass in the first place) so it hits your camera lens, goes straight through, and slams the sensor.

[dllu]

You seem to be implying that all automotive lidar are 1550 nm but that's not true. While there are lots of 1550 nm automotive lidars (Luminar on Volvo, Seyond on NIO) there are also plenty of 850 nm to 940 nm lidars are used in cars (Hesai, Robosense, etc). Those can pass through water and get focused to your retina, but they are also a lot lower power so they do not damage cameras.

[culi]

Also although that energy longer than 1400nm is generally absorbed by the cornea and lens, it is still energy, and it is not a hard bandpass filter per se. Safety is relative at higher wattages.

[OneDeuxTriSeiGo]

NGL I thought sub 1550nm LIDAR had been banned for use in new automotive applications already? I clearly must be mistaken but I had thought that was the case.

[dllu]

Not banned. In addition to the Chinese lidars I mentioned, the Valeo Scala on Audi cars is 905 nm, and then there are also Ouster (865 nm), Innoviz (905 nm), Livox (905 nm) etc. The large spinning lidar on top of the Waymo Jaguar I-Pace is also purportedly 905 nm, although in the past they also had a swivelling 1550 nm lidar in the dome of the Chrysler Pacifica cars (situated just underneath a smaller spinning 905 nm one).

The eye safety threshold for 850/905 nm is a lot lower than 1550 nm, so they output way less power, but the much better sensitivity of silicon sensors makes up for it partially. You can also squeeze out more range using clever signal processing and a large optical aperture (which allows you to output more light, but since the light is spread out across the aperture, the intensity doesn't exceed the threshold). Typically, the range of 850/905 nm lidars is less than that of 1550 nm lidars though.

On the bright side, due to lower power, there hasn't been any instances (to my knowledge) of 850 nm and 905 nm lidars damaging cameras, whereas at least two different 1550 nm lidars have been known to destroy cameras (Luminar and AEye).

On the Luminar lidar website [1] they proudly advertise "1,000,000x pulse energy of 905nm".

[1] https://www.luminartech.com/technology

[kappi]

During the presentation, Rivian speaker specifically said it is safe for your camera sensors. Check the youtube video of their presentation

[OneDeuxTriSeiGo]

Ah. Theirs may be then. In which case they are probably using a different wavelength and a different glass.

I was just speaking in terms of the commonplace LIDAR solutions for road use.