Should Pyra have a Camera?

[bzar]

I don't vocally object to a camera or complain if one happens to be in Pyra. You could say I'm indifferent to the matter of the camera itself. Still, there are a few scenarios in which I'd have a more pronounced opinion one way or the other:

• If the camera was really awesome (better than in general smart phones) or could do stuff a regular camera can't (like a pelican)
• If something had to be dropped/dimished to make room for the camera
• If the camera adds a notable amount to the retail price
• If the camera in any way makes the rest of Pyra worse (less structural strength beause of the required holes, power consumption or something)

Given none of those happen, I have no foreseeable arguments, pro nor con, to a camera.

 

[rohezal]

I wanted to ask if we can have 2 cameras for something like the pelican. We have a dsp, so the Stereo Disparität can be calculated fast. With the knows distance of the cameras even better. This would be awesone, we could get 3d informations with the Pyra. Great for robotics. Did some CUDA Programming for the Stereo Vision stuff, it realy speeded things up, I think this is the same with dsp in the omap5.

 

[WizardStan]

You're probably looking at about $20-$30 per camera. You may be able to make a compelling argument for adding one, but I'm not sure how many people would go for 2 or 3.

 

[b_o_b]

I don't think the "no cameras rules" problem should stop us from adding a camera in the Pyra.

I don't care for a build-in camera and I think there are plenty of alternatives, but I agree that the security rationale is not a very good one. We are talking about a very small group of people that might be affected by it.

Based on this poll it seems like almost 50% of the members like to have a camera. If it is possible without adding a lot of complexity - that is my main concern - and doesn't add a lot of costs it might be worth adding.

 

[_wb_]

You're probably looking at about $20-$30 per camera. You may be able to make a compelling argument for adding one, but I'm not sure how many people would go for 2 or 3.

What? I don't know what you have in mind, but something like this would be fine for me, priced at $3.01:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Mini-Stylish-USB-2-0-5M-Meter-Retractable-Clip-WebCam-Web-Camera-Laptop-PC-/111243706834?pt=PCA_Video_Conferencing_Webcams&hash=item19e6a441d2

and that's with a 5 meter retractable cable etc. The camera itself, when bought in large quantities, is probably not more than $1 or so. Maybe we can go for something better than that, but $20-$30?

 

[WizardStan]

:blink:

What the heck is that and where can we get the things it is made of? I priced out camera modules a little while ago, no USB or TV out or anything, just the raw data lines which would need to be converted (or plugged directly into the OMAPs camera feature) and they were in the $20-$30 range, a few low end ones for $15.

If we can get some low-end-but-not-completely-crappy cameras for under $5 that'd be amazing.

 

[Null]

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Mini-Stylish-USB-2-0-5M-Meter-Retractable-Clip-WebCam-Web-Camera-Laptop-PC-/111243706834?pt=PCA_Video_Conferencing_Webcams&hash=item19e6a441d2

We are Chinese seller.


We Ship Worldwide BUT NOT TO CHINA,

 

[slaeshjag]

Something like this? http://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/OVM7690-R20A/884-1019-2-ND/2123271

The tiny size makes me suspicious about if it can get any picture quality worth using, even for video calls...

 

[Grench]

Some companies like Audi or hosting services don't allow cameras because of security issues. As I know that quite some system administrators use the Pandora in-house, that would be a downside.


Sent from my Xperia Pro using Tapatalk

Please please please don't get suckered into putting a camera on the device.  It's just a development and support headache that the project doesn't need.  Do you really want returns because the crappy 1mm lens camera's chromatic aberration is unacceptable?

P1 had a history of quality issues, especially the CC Pandora's. I guess the approach to the Pyra should be to KISS. Don't add complexity if not really needed. I don't think a camera adds a lot of value and there is an easy, comfortable and cheap workaround for folks who want one.

E.g.  http://www.ebay.com/itm/Mini-Stylish-USB-2-0-5M-Meter-Retractable-Clip-WebCam-Web-Camera-Laptop-PC-/111243706834?pt=PCA_Video_Conferencing_Webcams&hash=item19e6a441d2

Note:  That thing is 35g and -huge-.  It's the size of a nub, and still won't have very good quality.

Seem the only thing about them that aren't standard, is good cameras. Let's change that.

Good cameras cannot practically be built into a handheld console or computer.

Good cameras look like this:

http://images03.olx.com.pk/ui/2/87/01/1374296514_529408601_1-Pictures-of--Canon-PowerShot-HS-220-excellent-condition.jpg

or this:

http://www.ephotozine.com/articles/panasonic-lumix-dmc-fz200-digital-camera-review-20309/images/highres-panasonic-lumix-dmc-fz200-lens-extended-1_1348667326.jpg

or maybe this:

http://tonacitran.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/red-gunner-4.jpg

Not this:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a7/Nokia_5800_XpressMusic_Camera.jpg

Judging from the mixed responses to this thread, I would suggest that anything more that a bad (normal smartphone) camera is a waste of space and budget

It's simple physics.  Digital cameras measure light.  Light reaches the sensor via a lens.  To get high quality (chromatic and spatial detail), it must capture more light.  That requires a larger lens and a longer focal distance.

Recently a Nokia Windows phone was released with a pretty decent camera.  The camera is about 1/3 the device size and volume.

So, when people talk about putting in 'good' cameras into a space in the hinge of a Pandora/Pyra type device, laugh hysterically and point.  They're clearly cracking a joke.

Seem the only thing about them that aren't standard, is good cameras. Let's change that.

Good cameras cannot practically be built into a handheld console or computer.

Good cameras as in today or yesteryear phone standards. Of course I wasn't talking about dedicated cameras. 

No. Such. Thing.  Physics.  Next?

They're better than they used to be.  That said, your grandmother's Brownie captured more gradient light and detail.

You're probably looking at about $20-$30 per camera. You may be able to make a compelling argument for adding one, but I'm not sure how many people would go for 2 or 3.

Not just the price of the module.  It has to be mounted, the lens has to be kept clean through manufacturing, etc...  If it's of any quality it will have a mechanical zoom - which is nifty until it malfunctions.  Also consider that the software development costs would have to be done upfront.  If the device is going to advertise and ship with the camera - drivers and software for the camera has to be ready at release.  So, realistically -double- that per unit for real costs of adding this feature.

It isn't worth $10 let alone $60 to me for them to add another crappy camera to another device.  Cheap stand alone digital cameras that do BETTER than we're likely to get in the hinge are in that price range.

You're probably looking at about $20-$30 per camera. You may be able to make a compelling argument for adding one, but I'm not sure how many people would go for 2 or 3.

What? I don't know what you have in mind, but something like this would be fine for me, priced at $3.01:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Mini-Stylish-USB-2-0-5M-Meter-Retractable-Clip-WebCam-Web-Camera-Laptop-PC-/111243706834?pt=PCA_Video_Conferencing_Webcams&hash=item19e6a441d2

and that's with a 5 meter retractable cable etc. The camera itself, when bought in large quantities, is probably not more than $1 or so. Maybe we can go for something better than that, but $20-$30?

In one post people are talking about 'good' cameras, in another we're pointing to a cheap behemoth crap camera as an example for pricing.  I'm in the 'none of the above' camp on this one.

Something like this? http://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/OVM7690-R20A/884-1019-2-ND/2123271

The tiny size makes me suspicious about if it can get any picture quality worth using, even for video calls...

Exactly.   Those are $8 each for 640x480.  Add in mounting, case engineering around it,  software support, etc... and you're easily talking about a $30-$50 per unit feature - and it's still a really crappy camera.

 

[God Ginrai]

Recently a Nokia Windows phone was released with a pretty decent camera.  The camera is about 1/3 the device size and volume.

So, when people talk about putting in 'good' cameras into a space in the hinge of a Pandora/Pyra type device, laugh hysterically and point.  They're clearly cracking a joke.

Why is that? The top half of the clamshell only contains the screen and the speakers. It's conceivable that this could have room for a larger camera that doesn't suck, assuming the hardware to make this happen is not too deep. That's why I asked the question I asked earlier. However, judging by how everyone ignored it to talk about tiny cheap cameras, it seems no one was interested in that idea. :\

-God Ginrai

 

[ckblackm]

No, please.   (If one is, please put a physical slot cover for it).

 

[Grench]

Recently a Nokia Windows phone was released with a pretty decent camera.  The camera is about 1/3 the device size and volume.


So, when people talk about putting in 'good' cameras into a space in the hinge of a Pandora/Pyra type device, laugh hysterically and point.  They're clearly cracking a joke.

Why is that? The top half of the clamshell only contains the screen and the speakers. It's conceivable that this could have room for a larger camera that doesn't suck, assuming the hardware to make this happen is not too deep. That's why I asked the question I asked earlier. However, judging by how everyone ignored it to talk about tiny cheap cameras, it seems no one was interested in that idea. :\

-God Ginrai

Clearly you are looking at your existing Pandora and think we're building it again.  We're not.  We're talking about the Pyra.

The lid on the Pyra is going to be nothing but screen and it's required bezel.  With a 5" diagonal 16:9 screen, any additional crap in the lid will make it unpocketable.  End of story.

Speakers need to be down in the hinge or keyboard area.

A camera, if one were added, would need to be in the hinge or looking up your nose from the front of the keyboard.

I'd rather have a pair of crappy speakers than a crappy camera.  Skip the camera - unneeded complications.

 

[Natsu]

No. Such. Thing.  Physics.  Next?

They're better than they used to be.  That said, your grandmother's Brownie captured more gradient light and detail.

What are you talking about? Compare a VGA camera to a Galaxy S4 camera. You know what I mean, seriously. Smh

 

[moxie]

Well, physics play a part there too. The distance between lens and sensor is important - The shorter the distance (and thus the shallower the camera), the more the lens has to refract the light in order for it to focus properly to the sensor. The stronger the refraction, the more prominent the distortions and colour aberrations. Which can be compensated for in the camera firmware, of course (these days the DSPs are amazing), but that of course necessitates someone who likes writing advanced image processing code for a DSP, and the DSP itself...

 

[God Ginrai]

Clearly you are looking at your existing Pandora and think we're building it again.  We're not.  We're talking about the Pyra.

The lid on the Pyra is going to be nothing but screen and it's required bezel.  With a 5" diagonal 16:9 screen, any additional crap in the lid will make it unpocketable.  End of story.

Speakers need to be down in the hinge or keyboard area.

Just because people have discussed speakers on the base of the device in the keymap discussion does not mean that is how it is going to be. Hell, it doesn't even make sense to do that. We have limited enough space at the back of the device, putting speaker modules at the top of the base would use up precious board space where we would put connectors for the ports on the back.

-God Ginrai

 

[b_o_b]

Not sure what kind of quality people are looking for, but I don't like the idea of paying an additional >$5 for a camera. I assume this is needed mostly for video-calls. For that you don't need a high quality camera.

The eeepc 701 also had a camera and imo something similar should be good enough.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/kZgW454svhU?feature=oembed

 

[moxie]

What are you talking about? Compare a VGA camera to a Galaxy S4 camera. You know what I mean, seriously. Smh

 

Ah. I've wondered how to get at what seems to me the big confusion, and perhaps this is a good place. Yes. Let's consider the Galaxy S4 camera. The S4 camera, of course, has a very expensive, excellent quality sensor that can pick out 13 Mpixels (the ever-useful marketing metric). It also has a very nice, optical-glass F2.2 lens with a 4 mm focal length (31mm in analogue camera equivalents). The lens/sensor combination doesn't, however, get close to great-grans Brownie. The reason for the quality of the pictures is that this is paired with a high-quality image DSP which runs carefully tweaked algorithms that compensate for the distorsions, average out the colours at the edges, removes noise, and so on. This brings the output to something that does get closer to an actual analogue film camera, and that is a lot better than a random VGA webcam from ten years ago. 

However, the sensors you are looking at here are not of S4 quality, but really rather like that VGA cam. And to that we have to add optics (both in terms of buying it and handling it in production and in use), DSP power (either in terms of an actual DSP or a slice of processor time), and of course that DSP code. That is:

Price of adding camera = Price of sensor + price of optics + price of DSP + price of code.

And when I say "price", it's not always in terms of dollars - It might also be in coder hours or device performance. 

 

[Natsu]

Galaxy S4 was just an example. I never said that phone cameras are better than dedicated cameras. That why I said by phone standards. 

VGA is fine for a front camera, but a rear facing one?

 

[moxie]

That's not the point. The point is that it isn't enough to look at a sensor module and say "Well, that's not too expensive - Why don't you put one in?".

 

[Natsu]

That's not the point. The point is that it isn't enough to look at a sensor module and say "Well, that's not too expensive - Why don't you put one in?".

Ah. I see your point.