A semi-off topic question. Is it not possible to get an accurate depth map based on a two camera stereoscopic setup? Like human eyes? Perhaps combine it with video processing to isolate objects at different depths.
It is and works great, see Subaru
The Camera Is the Lidar
51–60 of 77 posts
Re: The Camera Is the Lidar
#52A semi-off topic question. Is it not possible to get an accurate depth map based on a two camera stereoscopic setup? Like human eyes? Perhaps combine it with video processing to isolate objects at different depths.
I was watching a talk from Cruise that mentions this. The main problem with cameras is dynamic range. Dealing with different lighting conditions that can change quickly is hard (the sun is really good at washing out colors). Lidar doesn't care about the current lighting conditions.
Re: The Camera Is the Lidar
#53A semi-off topic question. Is it not possible to get an accurate depth map based on a two camera stereoscopic setup? Like human eyes? Perhaps combine it with video processing to isolate objects at different depths.
I was watching a talk from Cruise that mentions this. The main problem with cameras is dynamic range. Dealing with different lighting conditions that can change quickly is hard (the sun is really good at washing out colors). Lidar doesn't care about the current lighting conditions. https://youtu.be/s-8cYj_eh8E?t=22m39s
Also heavy rain would be a problem for regular cameras. Not just seeing through the airborne droplets, but also (at a guess far more significantly) the water directly in contact with the windscreen causing severe random distortions.
Re: The Camera Is the Lidar
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was watching a talk from Cruise that mentions this. The main problem with cameras is dynamic range. Dealing with different lighting conditions that can change quickly is hard (the sun is really good at washing out colors). Lidar doesn't care about the current lighting conditions. https://youtu.be/s-8cYj_eh8E?t=22m39s
Also heavy rain would be a problem for regular cameras. Not just seeing through the airborne droplets, but also (at a guess far more significantly) the water directly in contact with the windscreen causing severe random distortions.
but heavy rain and also snow are also problems for lidar.
Re: The Camera Is the Lidar
#55A semi-off topic question. Is it not possible to get an accurate depth map based on a two camera stereoscopic setup? Like human eyes? Perhaps combine it with video processing to isolate objects at different depths.
the images need texture and edge detail to pick up on depth. Any portion of an image that is a solid colour would need to be interpolated in some way, possibly inaccurately. Occlusion is also a bit of a problem resulting in gaps in the depth map that need to be filled somehow.
here's an old comparison of algorithms. I imagine the state of the art has improved with Deep Neural Nets recently.
http://vision.middlebury.edu/stereo/eval3/
edit: surprise! the page appears to be kept up to-date with new algorithms and recent techniques, and indeed the top performer is from 2018.
Re: The Camera Is the Lidar
#56The problem is that deep learning should not be allowed in safety critical systems, because (1) the accuracy is always less than 100% even in known test situations, and (2) we don't know how it works and under what conditions it breaks down.
I was in a car crash two years ago where a man went into a diabetic fit/seizure and sped through an intersection, ultimately hitting a building and my car and killing himself in the process. It is too bad his car did not have some of this deep learning that is not 100% accurate.
We don't know how humans work and under what conditions they break down, either.
Re: The Camera Is the Lidar
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
The most general answer to your question is Peter Drucker's (famous management guru) observation that every doubling of production of an item (over the lifetime, not yearly) resulted in a cost reduction of 20-30%. So right now, with very few LIDARs produced, we have a high price, which will start dropping as more are produced. You might find this interesting: a single transistor used to sell for roughly the equivalen…
At quantity 1, though, most of the cost is from the person who has to package it. Qty 100 will give you a much more accurate price.
[deleted]
Re: The Camera Is the Lidar
#58The problem is that deep learning should not be allowed in safety critical systems, because (1) the accuracy is always less than 100% even in known test situations, and (2) we don't know how it works and under what conditions it breaks down.
Somewhat related anegdote: in France there one of the option for toll roads is a device that handles a payment for you and opens the barrier as the car approaches (it works up to 30 km/h).
A friend of mine was doing that in a new car with some pedestrian detection system that decided to detect the barrier as a human and slam the brakes to the complete stop. From what I've heard it was not exactly pleasant.
Re: The Camera Is the Lidar
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Just make update transparency part of the initial certification. Somehow I doubt the authorities have the foresight.
Even when they do, corporations will attempt to subvert process and policy "interlocks". See: Industry wide emissions cheating scandal.
They do that sort of thing occasionally, but on the whole, over time, cars have improved with regard to emissions and safety, mostly due to regulation.
Re: The Camera Is the Lidar
#60The blog post is very badly written to figure out what really these folks are doing and what sets them apart. Here’s my guess: they are detecting laser bounces using modified camera and using that camera to generate visual image at the same time as point cloud. It’s still a mechanical moving lidar at 10hz, range is 120m and resolution of 2048 horizontal beams per 360-degree and 16 beams verticle looks pretty good, although not completely out of the league.