Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Intel RealSense Stereo Depth Cameras

intelrealsense.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 70 posts

Re: Intel RealSense Stereo Depth Cameras

#61

Post by knowitnone »

nindalf wrote: post #35
MrBuddyCasino wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it made us look elsewhere, as it does not seem like Intel is serious about developing/maintaining this product line Everyone has to find out eventually, that unless „product line“ is high-margin CPUs, Intel will cancel it sooner or later. I hope they aren’t stupid enough to do that with their GPUs (again).

Yep, Intel isn't serious about any product. People criticise Google for killing products, but Intel has reached a point where their continued existence is threatened by a lack of faith in their ability to continue products without killing them. What lunatic would build on their fab when TSMC exists? And if no one is going to use Intel fabs, then what hope does Intel have to be competitive long term?

at this point, they should just discontinue the CPUs. They obviously can't compete in that space. Not being sarcastic here.

Re: Intel RealSense Stereo Depth Cameras

#62

Post by sitkack »

knowitnone wrote: post #61
nindalf wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep, Intel isn't serious about any product. People criticise Google for killing products, but Intel has reached a point where their continued existence is threatened by a lack of faith in their ability to continue products without killing them. What lunatic would build on their fab when TSMC exists? And if no one is going to use Intel fabs, then what hope does Intel have to be competitive long term?

at this point, they should just discontinue the CPUs. They obviously can't compete in that space. Not being sarcastic here.

They should just sell one cpu.

Re: Intel RealSense Stereo Depth Cameras

#63

Post by zamadatix »

phkahler wrote: post #53
zamadatix wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you clarify which other page?

Near the top of the "Learn More" page: https://www.intelrealsense.com/depth-module-d421/ Right under the top picture of the module it says "Recommended range 0.2 to 2m" meanwhile on the main page linked from HN is says "Ideal Range 60cm to 6m" So 60cm on the front, but one click away on "Learn More" link, it drops by a factor of 3.

That is the product page for the D421 module but "60cm to 6m" is under the D456's section on the main page. RealSense is a family of modules/cameras and each product section has its own "Learn more" link, here is the one from the D456's section: https://www.intelrealsense.com/depth-camera-d456/

Re: Intel RealSense Stereo Depth Cameras

#64

Post by dcanelhas »

Symmetry wrote: post #39

Long, long ago the the Kinect came out and it was able to provide 3D imaging for robotics companies at an incredibly good pricepoint compared to everything that came before it. Then the company that made it created a version with just the 3D sensor and that was even better. But then Apple bought them for what would later become face unlock. Apple wasn't interested in being a component supplier so they discontinued se…

You can still buy primesense devices afaik

http://xtionprolive.com/asus-xtion-pro-live

Re: Intel RealSense Stereo Depth Cameras

#65

Post by dcanelhas »

ftrobro wrote: post #30

I've tried to use Intel RealSense in the past but found the output to be unreliable. I had much better results with Chronoptics KEA: https://www.chronoptics.com/products/kea

In what way was it unreliable? And how does Chronoptics ToF sensor perform better?

Re: Intel RealSense Stereo Depth Cameras

#66

Post by rurban »

We use their stereo cams for pointclouds, but are not exactly happy about it. Very fragile USB-C transport, the headers are a horrible mess (only fixed in our local fork), their streaming server changed completely (we are still using the old one).

Lots of my code deals with just realsense resetting, firmware uploading just to unblock comms, restarting or even rebooting the device. And they blocked firmware uploads in their new versions, so you cannot unblock comms anymore without rebooting.

Not recommended.

Re: Intel RealSense Stereo Depth Cameras

#67

Post by fxtentacle »

ofrzeta wrote: post #10
momoschili wrote: post #3

These have been around since at least 2016 and haven't really made any real waves... it's another technology Intel held out to dry. Stereo is a reliable tech that is relatively simple to implement but for the most part it seems to be have been left behind by other methods that are better suited for compact form factors in consumer like time of flight, or even LIDAR. Intel itself tried its hand at LIDAR, but shuttered…

> Stereo is a reliable tech that is relatively simple to implement why are the cameras so expensive then? I guess their optics aren't particularly high-grade either.

One part that surely drives up the price is that they use global shutter sensors. These are typically reserved for DSLRs. Smartphones use much cheaper rolling shutter sensors. But that's also the reason why smartphone pictures get distorted when you move the camera too much. These distortions would make 3D triangulation impossible.

Re: Intel RealSense Stereo Depth Cameras

#68

Post by Symmetry »

dcanelhas wrote: post #64
Symmetry wrote: post #39

Long, long ago the the Kinect came out and it was able to provide 3D imaging for robotics companies at an incredibly good pricepoint compared to everything that came before it. Then the company that made it created a version with just the 3D sensor and that was even better. But then Apple bought them for what would later become face unlock. Apple wasn't interested in being a component supplier so they discontinued se…

You can still buy primesense devices afaik http://xtionprolive.com/asus-xtion-pro-live

Apple wasn't super interested in enforcing their intellectual property claims against Chinese factories producing a product they weren't competing with any more, but relying on those isn't a viable longer term plan for a commercial product.

Re: Intel RealSense Stereo Depth Cameras

#70

Post by ftrobro »

dcanelhas wrote: post #65
ftrobro wrote: post #30

I've tried to use Intel RealSense in the past but found the output to be unreliable. I had much better results with Chronoptics KEA: https://www.chronoptics.com/products/kea

In what way was it unreliable? And how does Chronoptics ToF sensor perform better?

Unreliable as in noisy in a way that I could not fix with temporal averaging. I tried to guide a robot arm to pick up the top object in a bag of evenly colored objects, but RealSense gave me randomly fluctuating values and rather large undefined areas (areas that were blocked from the view of one of the two sensors). The ToF sensor gave solid values even outside when it was snowing. Of course the ToF sensor had other problems, high requirements for power and cooling, and perhaps worse performance in very strong sunlight.
Post reply on HN