08:19 | aombk | joined the channel | |
09:14 | aombk | left the channel | |
09:18 | Bertl | morning everyone!
| |
09:35 | se6astian | joined the channel | |
09:36 | se6astian | Hello!
| |
09:39 | Bertl | hello!
| |
09:46 | se6astian | about the FPGA: Could we just leave the space that we don't need in the end as Partial Reconfiguration Area and already build in the interfaces to get image data to and from that area even thought its unused for now?
| |
09:47 | Bertl | no, not really
| |
09:48 | Bertl | for partial reconfiguration, you need to know beforehand what you want to plug-in and where
| |
09:48 | Bertl | think of it like having a physical socket, where you can plugin a chip
| |
09:50 | Bertl | but what is the idea of having a plug-in architecture for the FPGA?
| |
09:51 | Bertl | I mean, I get it for filters and similar, but you basically know the interface for that beforehand and you usually don't do generalized plugins because of the added complexity
| |
09:52 | Bertl | also it gets really complicated if you want to have more than one plugin :)
| |
09:54 | Bertl | here, something to read: http://www.wiki.xilinx.com/Zynq+7000+Partial+Reconfiguration+Reference+Design
| |
09:56 | se6astian | ok so an app store for the FPGA where you can add new codecs for example is not really possible, the only thing we could do is that you can download one codec at a time only and that contains an entirely new binary FPGA image right?
| |
09:57 | Bertl | codec for encoding the image I presume?
| |
09:57 | Bertl | (so strictly speaking an encoder)
| |
09:58 | se6astian | yes, like a lossless raw encoder
| |
09:59 | se6astian | I am thinking out loud if this app store could be of interest to IP providers currently
| |
09:59 | se6astian | like IntoPIX
| |
09:59 | Bertl | unlikely, for several reasons:
| |
10:00 | FergusL | left the channel | |
10:00 | se6astian | they could sell their proprietary jpeg2000 IP core to end users if we allow LGPL embedding of their stuff in our framework
| |
10:00 | Bertl | - licensing (how to prevent the IP from being used without license?)
| |
10:01 | Bertl | - interfaces (we cannot accomodate all possible encoding IPs)
| |
10:01 | Bertl | - optimization and FPGA space (with 4K@150FPS timing is critical)
| |
10:02 | se6astian | ad licensing - yes same as with current apps on android/iphone
| |
10:02 | Bertl | so you want to make a closed camera now?
| |
10:03 | Bertl | which needs to be rooted/jailbroken to run free software?
| |
10:03 | se6astian | ad interfaces - they could adapt our code to provide the proper interface for them (only release the changes they made as open source)
| |
10:04 | Bertl | well, if they adapt our interfaces, it is basically a complete FPGA reconfiguration, no?
| |
10:04 | Bertl | and it won't work for any other codec and definitely wouldn't allow more than one
| |
10:04 | se6astian | so you want to make a closed camera now? no - I want to go through some "what if scenarios" to see how we can make everything even more modular
| |
10:06 | se6astian | the android scenario is interesting as the system itself is open (though owned by google) but it allows an ecosystem of closed and open source apps to run on it as platfom
| |
10:06 | Bertl | no, not really
| |
10:08 | se6astian | please elaborate
| |
10:09 | Bertl | well, android is open source, yes, it also uses a linux kernel (also open source)
| |
10:09 | Bertl | but an android device, by default, is locked down
| |
10:10 | Bertl | i.e. you can only install applications certified by google (in some way)
| |
10:11 | Bertl | also it makes heavy use of access and permission control, i.e. your app is not able to do certain things, like modifying the kernel or so
| |
10:11 | Bertl | (which is important for the security)
| |
10:17 | se6astian | but locked devices are the result of manufacturers who implement it, not androids fault...
| |
10:17 | Bertl | also note, that on a rooted android device, you can easily install apps you would have to pay for without paying :)
| |
10:18 | se6astian | you can actually also installed an *.apk that you would have to pay for on a non rooted device
| |
10:19 | se6astian | anyway, I think we are distracting ourselves here :)
| |
10:19 | se6astian | the core idea was: can we bring an app store like experience to the camera world?
| |
10:20 | Bertl | what I am saying is, no IP provider will attach to an 'open' interface which could easily be used to wrap their IP without any permission from the IP provider, by just copying it from an axiom camera
| |
10:20 | se6astian | and curently it looks like we can, but only with official and unofficial full FPGA images basically
| |
10:21 | se6astian | like you can get custom ROMs for your rooted android device
| |
10:21 | Bertl | yes I think we could do that but I'm also sure that we do not want to do that because it would be a lot of work for little gain
| |
10:21 | Bertl | (the app store experience)
| |
10:22 | Bertl | I doubt that IP providers will allow unsigned FPGA images :)
| |
10:22 | se6astian | I see
| |
10:23 | Bertl | again, nothing would stop the end-users from sharing any IP
| |
10:23 | Bertl | (be it partial bitstream or complete FPGA image)
| |
10:25 | Bertl | but yesterday, I thought about the axiom and where you could actually make good use of such a device besides the obvious 'making movies'
| |
10:26 | Bertl | and I realized, that it would be the perfect device for machine vision and control
| |
10:27 | Bertl | (mainly because of the open platform and the ability to tinker with hard and software)
| |
10:27 | Bertl | (assuming that 'we' do not decide to go the proprietary path :)
| |
10:29 | se6astian | yes, Konstantin also had some ideas about scientific/inspection use cases right at his workplace (swiss watch manufacturing) :)
| |
10:30 | Bertl | so it might make perfect sense to have two or even more software branches for the same hardware, i.e. one for movie makers, the other one for scientists, the third one for solution providers ...
| |
10:31 | se6astian | if we do get customers in that market segments we can also afford maintaining such branches yes
| |
10:32 | se6astian | but I know nothing about these use cases tbh
| |
10:32 | Bertl | which again brings be to the conclusion that if we manage to make a reasonably good product, it doesn't have to be cheap that cheap and more importantly, we can break it down into small pieces and fund each of them separately
| |
10:32 | Bertl | s/be/me/
| |
10:32 | Bertl | s/cheap that/that/
| |
10:33 | se6astian | but there are already some industry cameras even with the same image sensor
| |
10:33 | se6astian | like http://www.vieworks.com/homepage/mv/product/product_view.php?sn_series=6
| |
10:34 | Bertl | do they allow to run your IP on them?
| |
10:34 | Bertl | do they allow you to run your IP on them?
| |
10:35 | Bertl | are they cost efficient?
| |
10:35 | Bertl | btw, interresting that they do 180fps on the CMV12k :)
| |
10:35 | se6astian | yes, old sensor specs :)
| |
10:36 | se6astian | they all come with an SDK but I have no idea what that allows you to change
| |
10:36 | Bertl | well, let's put the it other way round:
| |
10:36 | se6astian | Arent most automation/industrial applications centered around interpreting/processing the images on a host pc?
| |
10:36 | Bertl | let's say, you are a solution provider, and oscar is the customer
| |
10:37 | Bertl | you pick the VC-12MX-M/C 180 and want to 'make' a movie camera with it
| |
10:37 | Bertl | what will be required? what will be the costs?
| |
10:40 | se6astian | a "solution provider" is like a product developer but for a single customer only right?
| |
10:40 | Bertl | basically, yes
| |
10:41 | Bertl | somebody who does all the work required to get a custom solution
| |
10:41 | se6astian | I see, yes then Axiom is very attractinve
| |
10:41 | Bertl | now how many companies use off the shelve products for machine vision?
| |
10:41 | se6astian | also because I dont need to publish any code changes I make because I only use the result "in house"
| |
10:41 | se6astian | like what google did with the Elphel cameras
| |
10:43 | Bertl | for example
| |
10:44 | Bertl | and IMHO that will also be the most interesting area for revenue (i.e. providing solutions based on the axiom)
| |
10:45 | se6astian | because custom solutions are in general very expensive and if the camera is now 5000€ or 20.000€ will not make much of a difference for the end sum anyway right
| |
10:46 | Bertl | precisely, and it doesn't matter if we actually build the camera or not, as long as we are 'the axiom guys'
| |
10:50 | se6astian | how do you mean "it doesnt matter if we build the camera or not"?
| |
10:51 | Bertl | well, I think we will not be able to make money from 'building' the camera (i.e. from the hardware itself)
| |
10:51 | Bertl | I do not mean that we should not build it at all :)
| |
10:52 | Bertl | but I think axiom/apertus would be fine if after the second axiom prototype somebody steps up to build the entire thing for us (not even paying any royalties)
| |
10:53 | se6astian | but those solution providers would also just buy it from that someone who builds the Axiom in the end, how will we get any money from it?
| |
10:54 | Bertl | because they will either sub-contract us (for development) or because we actually _will_be_ those solution providers :)
| |
10:55 | Bertl | despite the fact that the code and hardware design is public, a solution provider does not want to dig into details on every platform (s)he uses
| |
10:57 | se6astian | I see
| |
10:59 | se6astian | Elphel has received several of such requests: "can you make a custom camera based on your elphel camera for my application"
| |
10:59 | Bertl | and did they do it?
| |
11:00 | se6astian | but always turned them down because they want to create a general-purpose-camera only and leave the customizations to others
| |
11:00 | se6astian | since everything is open and available anyway
| |
11:00 | se6astian | they are looking for value-adding-applications
| |
11:00 | Bertl | hehe, now I understand ...
| |
11:01 | se6astian | like mediworks, a company in china is building microscopes with built in elphel cameras
| |
11:01 | se6astian | not sure if they were successful, but the idea is to have no work but grow sales :)
| |
11:05 | Bertl | so, IMHO it is important to focus on keeping it simple but extensible and more importantly adaptable for all kind of crazy uses
| |
11:06 | se6astian | yes
| |
11:06 | Bertl | and personally I wouldn't bother with anything security or proprietary related because that just adds a lot of workload with little gain
| |
11:07 | se6astian | which did not really work out for Elphel because the camera is rather complex and take a lot of time to get into, beside google there is no big customers who did it
| |
11:07 | se6astian | ok, time for lunch
| |
11:07 | se6astian | bbs
| |
11:07 | se6astian | great insights, btw :)
| |
11:40 | se6astian | ok and now I need to do some lecture hall installations
| |
11:57 | Bertl | do not install too many halls :)
| |
11:59 | se6astian | left the channel | |
15:47 | se6astian | joined the channel | |
15:47 | se6astian | time to go home :)
| |
15:47 | se6astian | left the channel | |
16:22 | FergusL | joined the channel | |
16:32 | Bertl | welcome FergusL!
| |
16:43 | se6astian | joined the channel | |
16:44 | Bertl | wb se6astian!
| |
16:46 | se6astian | thanks, back home now :)
| |
16:46 | se6astian | I am summarizing the appstore discussion we had on the iwiki
| |
16:47 | Bertl | I am working on axiom alpha :)
| |
16:48 | se6astian | good, cary on :)
| |
16:48 | Bertl | thanks!
| |
17:04 | se6astian | https://iwiki.apertus.org/index.php?title=AppStore
| |
17:06 | se6astian | my reason for the "app store" is that its a very good way to illustrate what open source can do for people - it illustrates the concept of extendability and ease of use using something everybody knows/experienced already
| |
17:07 | Bertl | seems to require access credentials
| |
17:08 | se6astian | aka opensource = you get new stuff easily
| |
20:24 | dmj_nova | left the channel |