Closed Digital Cameras - Does Anyone Care? 506
Karamchand asks: "Free Software and open standards are ubiquitous in the server and even desktop area. But why does nobody seem to care about openness in digital cameras? I couldn't find a single hint as to what main processor my camera uses (I guess many use ARMs and others use TI DSPs), and while searching for information about (re-)programming digital cameras, I had to give up (apart from the scriptable Digita OS which was used by some discontinued cameras by Kodak, HP et al). Do you know of any efforts in this direction, whether they are actual disassembling/programming of cameras or asking vendors to get more open?" I still have my Kodak DIGITA-based camera from several years ago and I loved the flexibility, even though the performance is poor by today's standards (long cycle times, poor battery life, etc). Why are digital camera manufacturers keeping the lid on the capabilities of their products, when digital cameras could be so much more than their film-based counterparts?
I know what OS your camera runs... (Score:3, Interesting)
If you are interested you should look here: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/canondigicamhacking/ [yahoo.com]
Personally, I try to concentrate on the artistic aspect of photography rather than the technical one. It's much more fun.
Re:Obvious reason (Score:2, Interesting)
Some People... (Score:3, Interesting)
1. Turn it into a temporary USB data storage device if it has a USB port on it
2. If it has audio capability, turn it into a digital audio recorder that works kind of like a mini-cassette recorder (ie. shitty quality, but lots of record time)
3. Make it into a "cam" that can be attached to your PC for live web cam stuff
4. Turn it into a video recorder for short clips in a format like MJPEG
5. Make it into an e-book reader that can read PDF or Postscript docs (after all many digital cameras have scroll wheels and multiple menu buttons, etc...)
6. Play some old school video games on them: Space Invaders, Pac Man, maybe even Doom. Doom's been done before...
7. Set it up for motion sensitive mode. It will span a picture only when something in the field of view moves
8. Or similar to above, in motion sensitive mode with USB, it could just dump the image straight to your PC whenever there is motion. Imagine combining this with a laptop to work as a spycam...
9. MP3 or Ogg Vobis player the works from CD or Flash media (again if your camera has audio capability)
10. A USB video monitor. Combine your camera with a Mac Mini and a foldup KB and mouse and you have a pretty compact but powerful system for travelling. (Yes, I don't mind squinting at small screens)
That's just ten ideas to get you started. I'm sure I'm not the only person with any imagination here... Note, I didn't say that these ideas would work for every camera, but they are feasible for at least some models. I'm pretty sure my Sony CD Mavica could do a lot more than it does right now. But I'm also pretty sure they probably have the OS on a ROM...
Comment removed (Score:3, Interesting)
HDR images (Score:2, Interesting)
Debevec has a method where you take multiple shots of the same image at different F-stops, and through some post-processing magic, extract a reasonnable HDR approximation (sorry, you'll have to Google it, I don't have the link handy).
An Open camera would allow someone to program the camera to take the required shots automatically (and possibly even generate the HDR image, though it's probably best to do it offline where CPU power and battery life aren't an issue).
Another possible use is to extract raw data even if your camera only exports JPG images, for those extra bits of precision (I seem to remember some Canon cameras that allow you to get at the raw, 11- or 12-bit image).
I'd like an Open camera, not to run Linux or MAME on it (that's probably a running joke by now) but to add capabilities that the original manufacturer won't bother with due to a limited market, etc.
Of course a decent scripting language could do this as well without "opening" the camera...
I Want My ProgrammableCamera! (Score:2, Interesting)
-use it as a tethered HDTV camera, probably. (If the exposure is -Make timelapse movies, like those nifty cloud motion pictures.
-Use it to do automated functions like live webcam snapshots. What elese could you program it for?
I have to do something with my old digital camera, now that I don't feel like shelling out $70 for a battery that would hold a charge...
But, the camera people (a) don't want to give secrets to the competition and (b) why let someone else show you how to upgrade your features without buying anything?
I do think they're missing the boat here. Popular "hacker" products - TIVO, Apple II, IBM PC clones, etc. - became popular specifically because you could do extra things to them.
you know it's true... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Crippleware (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Obvious reason (Score:3, Interesting)
To be a DoD contractor, however, they cannot allow video cameras or tape recorders into ANY part of the building, open or closed. Cell phones are typically allowed, as well as pagers/blackberries.
As for closed areas, it all depends on the contracts being worked within. For example, in the closed area in which I work, employees can bring in cell phones, but they must be turned off. Contractors and visitors must leave theirs at the door. Other more stringent closed areas don't even allow employees to carry cell phones in.
Re:Crippleware (Score:3, Interesting)
The limitations of the Rebel aside, it's a great camera. In addition to the landscape work I enjoy, I also do event photography for a club [hubtall.org] that I belong to. As limiting as 2.5 fps and 4 frames may seem to be, I rarely run into problems with that, despite a distinctly run and gun shooting style (usually flash recharge gets me first, even at ISO 800). I wouldn't consider a 10D; it just doesn't have enough over the Rebel to justify it, and the Rebel has one objective advantage -- the ability to use EF/S lenses. The 20D is another matter, although the Rebel's easily good enough that I'm not about to shell out $1400 after only a year.
Re:Software = product differentiation (Score:3, Interesting)
40 minutes later i have a phone sporting GPRS, Java, keyboard shortcuts, voice dialing, polyphony and sound recording/reproduction, hands free, voice commands, and more avaiable memory. The only thing it lacks it's a color screen, and all for the price of an entry level phone plus 10 bucks. I thought i was lucky, but later found out this is very common for cellphones. The phones are identical (you can even exchange their fronts!), with the difference that the A56 is software crippled.
Thinking it later, it kinda made sense. Suppose you sell the phone for $10; you sell five for $50. Now you introduce a cheaper model for $7 and a more expensive one for $12 (which are all the same internally, with practically zero cost to you other than repackaging). Now you sell three of each, covering more price segments; you made $57. It's a quick example, but it's how it works.
Re:Obvious reason (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Obvious reason (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't see how an open camera could make digital do anything that it currently cannot, that film can. An exposure is based on a combination of three things, that's it: aperture, shutter speed, and sensitivity (ISO speed). All other features that the camera provides are just fluff, and are certainly not film-specific. I imagine the vast majority of digital cameras allow you to adjust these 3 settings; I know the two I've owned do. If you want to adjust these settings and your current camera doesn't allow you to, you're better off buying a new camera, not hacking the one you have -- there's probably plenty of other features you're missing as well.
If your camera offers a raw format (again, the two I've owned do), these raw files will contain the EXACT values that came off the sensor. If you have a better processing algorithm, you can implement it on your computer, no need to try to shove it into the camera (Canon at least implements their Bayer-reconstruction algorithm and other processing [sharpness, white balance, etc] in hardware on the camera, so you wouldn't be able to replace this even if you wanted to).
Besides, the general consensus is that for every application that mere photographic mortals care about, digital cameras CAN take the place of film. It still doesn't match the resolution of large-format, but an 'open' camera isn't going to do anything to help that. What exact situations are you referring to that an 'open' camera could help digital catch up in?
Re:Obvious reason (Score:4, Interesting)
While this is true, the image is more than just the exposure. You get color and intensity sensitivity variations between different kinds of films, for instance. And grain, of course.
If your camera offers a raw format (again, the two I've owned do), these raw files will contain the EXACT values that came off the sensor. If you have a better processing algorithm, you can implement it on your computer, no need to try to shove it into the camera
There's some truth to this, too, but what if you don't want to post-process to get a particular effect (eg emulate T-Max film)? Some people really hate photoshopping every image. This is why there are so many parameters to tune in pro-level digicams.
Besides, the general consensus is that for every application that mere photographic mortals care about, digital cameras CAN take the place of film.
That may be the general consensus amongst laymen, but not amongst photographers. Not yet, anyway. Amongst the two serious limitations of digital versus film today are limited gamut and severely limited exposure lattitude.
It's technically possible to correct both of those, of course, for a price.
But for the majority of photographic situations it's true that there's really no need for film anymore, and a lot of economies in digital.