or Connect
TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The Practice Range › Instruction and Playing Tips › Potential Analytical Golf Swing Camera
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Potential Analytical Golf Swing Camera - Page 2

post #19 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by nevets88 View Post

I don't think it's an fps problem. 240 is pretty good to see impact w/o blur in good lighting conditions. IMHO, if you want to sell more, making it stupid proof and super quick and easy to shoot video, perhaps interface with a larger screen, wifi upload, that sort of thing, will appeal to more people. Throw in a rainproof cover perhaps.
Voice command instead of a remote would be the bee's knees. Rainproof cover is a big plus for us addicts.
post #20 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ernest Jones View Post

Voice command instead of a remote would be the bee's knees. Rainproof cover is a big plus for us addicts.

Yes, or even Msft Kinect motion sensor activation. If you've seen Minority Report or the Black Mirror episode, I would wave my hand goodbye-ish to delete, I dunno, finger an S to save, that sort of thing.
post #21 of 41
And maybe a wind sensor? To warn you the camera is close to tipping over.
post #22 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Tracey View Post
 

It seems to me that my task is to discover what the minimum resolution is acceptable and what the minimum frame rate is acceptable and what price would be popular. I know I could design a low cost camera based on VGA ( 640 X 480 ) and 100 IPS  plus a global shutter, but then so could anybody else so why has it not already been done?

 

640 x 480/100 is too slow, but the resolution is fine.

 

640 x 480/300 is probably the sweet spot. But again, see my notes about orientation. Defaulting to portrait effectively raises the detail and pixel count by including less extraneous crap.

 

Any higher resolution is unnecessary, and you don't need a thousand FPS.

 

  • Have a "black and white mode" to further reduce file sizes for instructors that want that (plus, any lines you draw in color will be extra vibrant).
  • Have a 150 FPS mode at the same resolution if it's inexpensive to free.

 

Basically, if you could build a dummy-proof version (that didn't concern itself with photographs) of the Casio EX-F1, that would be pretty great.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Tracey View Post
 

I could add the remote control facility and a few other features to make it different but is it worth the NRE investment - it would cost about $120,000 to design but additional money would be needed for the marketing stage or a prior deal with a strong marketing organisation.  I will try to add a JPEG of the difference between a global shutter and a rolling shutter, but if it does not work perhaps somebody can tell me how to put it up on this forum.

 

Please see the email I sent you. I own the forum and would be happy to help.

post #23 of 41
Thread Starter 

Many thanks for all the suggestions and hopefully more will come  I am getting the aroma that 300 IPS is the target frame rate and that a resolution as low as 640 X 480 will do the job.  Have to go back through my database to try to find a sensor that can meet this.  At the moment I have an Omnvision that stops at 100 IPS and a Sony that stops at 164.  The answer ( unless somebody knows better) is my 1.3M at 1000 but performance reduced to get to the 300 and a suitable resolution that means we can use SD cards - the component cost will not go down however so the final product may still be up towards $1,000, but at least it will provide a sensible mobile outdoor practice range camera with features specific for golf.  Rainproof at IP65 is not a problem.

 

Lee Tracey

post #24 of 41

@Lee Tracey The sensors (OVT and Sony ones) you are looking at are commercial sensors they will never go fast enough. You will need to look to something special/custom from Cypress, On Semiconductor, BAE, someone like this to get the frame rates necessary. I also think you can cheat a little by using a cheaper lens. Basically it can have a fixed focal length because guys like Erik don't move their cameras all that often. Most of us taping the swing can have the camera at a fixed distance. The GoPro is a good example of the kind of lens you need. I think this can bring the cost down a ton. 

post #25 of 41
Thread Starter 

MCHEPP - I only mentioned the Omnivision and Sony as being sensors I already had in my parts bin but I thought I had made it clear that they would not do the job.  Below is the sensor I will use if this project does get off the ground.  As for the lens:  for my law enforcement evidence cameras I used a board lens that cost $4 - however for the GOLFCAM-01 I will not be able to get that cheap as the camera cannot afford the distortion that the $4 lens created, not that the police cared.

 

 

Sorry!  The forum refused to accept the attachment.  Send me your email address and I will copy direct to you.

 

Lee Tracey

 

dvr@dsl.pipex.com

post #26 of 41

Great idea. Once you get the specs sorted I am certain you will be able to get it funded via kickstarter. There is so much demand for a simple camera to do this that I think you would get enough support. I think a price of $1000 is a little high, around the $400-$500 mark would make it very popular.

post #27 of 41
Thread Starter 

Finally accepted the attachment when I converted  it to JPEG but refused it as a TIFF or PDF or Word or Coreldraw.

 

Lee Tracey

post #28 of 41
Thread Starter 

K14 Hacker: - I will struggle to get the end user price down to the $500 mark as to achieve the 640 X 512 at 300 IPS I will have to use the GP-01 sensor at its component cost of about $200 and just not use its full potential.  I have failed to find any other sensor that will reach 300 IPS.

 

Lee Tracey

post #29 of 41
Lee, the Casios (FH-25, etc.) cost about $300 years ago and very nearly did everything. 240 FPS, resolution a bit lower, etc.

The EX-F1 did it all (or super close) at $600-$900 and is five or six years old now.

You've not responded to my email.
post #30 of 41

A better way to actuate the camera is the sound of the club hitting the ball.  Have a rolling video recorded and buffered.  When impact is detected go backwards in the buffer and save a second or two forward.  Dump the rest.  I sure there may be challenges on a crowded range, perhaps a blue tooth microphone down in the hitting area.

 

A camera of this variety has more applications.  Baseball swing,  Pitchers motion, tennis. 

 

Good luck, I looked for USB cameras that met this criteria but was unable to find one.

post #31 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by iacas View Post

Lee, the Casios (FH-25, etc.) cost about $300 years ago and very nearly did everything. 240 FPS, resolution a bit lower, etc.

The EX-F1 did it all (or super close) at $600-$900 and is five or six years old now.

You've not responded to my email.

 

 

I have a Canon SX210 camera that does 240 fps. It doesn't have the manual shutter speed control, but it works well enough on sunny days outside. It runs about $200 dollars. Not a bad option on the low end of things. 

post #32 of 41
Thread Starter 

SAEVAL125:

 

I am familiar with all those low cost cameras and I have a lab with about fifty different models in various stages of dismantle.  But it is no use my trying to compete with these big boys.  I could build a twin lens version of the Garmin vehicle unit and use the same SOC but Garmin make 30,000 a month. I have to find a unique niche design that is so different and so better featured that it warrants the higher price due to the lower production rate.  In the police body worn world TASER make a poor resolution version which sells for a low price.  My version is 100 times better but costs nearly $900 - the sale is about 1 to every 100 Taser..

 

I find the math and the design aspect easy but the marketing bloody hard.  For about $120,000 NRE I can complete the full design and put about fifty fully finished pre-production units on the marketing table.  But from then on to set up an in-house marketing operation that could shift thousands I would need another $3 million investment.  In the UK just one competent sales engineer costs, with salary and expenses, £120,000 per year - and then still all the costly infrastructure to support them.  he route that a small backstreet bum like me has to go is to do deals with about 200 distributors world wide.  In the security industry that is difficult.  The believe I have is that the golf community will be much easier to approach.

 

Lee Tracey

post #33 of 41
Thread Starter 

post #34 of 41

A pretty fast shutter speed can greatly reduce the need for a global shutter.

 

We know what a rolling shutter can do: http://thesandtrap.com/t/34727/shaft-flex-as-seen-on-camera-photos-or-video-rolling-shutter-illusion .

post #35 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Tracey View Post
 

SAEVAL125:

 

I am familiar with all those low cost cameras and I have a lab with about fifty different models in various stages of dismantle.  But it is no use my trying to compete with these big boys.  I could build a twin lens version of the Garmin vehicle unit and use the same SOC but Garmin make 30,000 a month. I have to find a unique niche design that is so different and so better featured that it warrants the higher price due to the lower production rate.  In the police body worn world TASER make a poor resolution version which sells for a low price.  My version is 100 times better but costs nearly $900 - the sale is about 1 to every 100 Taser..

 

I find the math and the design aspect easy but the marketing bloody hard.  For about $120,000 NRE I can complete the full design and put about fifty fully finished pre-production units on the marketing table.  But from then on to set up an in-house marketing operation that could shift thousands I would need another $3 million investment.  In the UK just one competent sales engineer costs, with salary and expenses, £120,000 per year - and then still all the costly infrastructure to support them.  he route that a small backstreet bum like me has to go is to do deals with about 200 distributors world wide.  In the security industry that is difficult.  The believe I have is that the golf community will be much easier to approach.

 

Lee Tracey

 

@Lee Tracey The story you are sharing here has a number of similarities to the origin story of GoPro. This guy went with his camera idea all over Asia, found a company to make it and source it for him, and then spent the rest of his money giving to enthusiasts to promote his product. Make cool marketing videos and off he went. I think he did have a bit more than $120k but he had a vision and made it happen. His camera was not very good. He now has some of the best camera people in the business. 

post #36 of 41
Thread Starter 

mchepp - thanks for that.

 

My next task is to work out, or find out, exactly how much recording time is required per practice session.  My golf ignorance suggests that it would average out at about two hours and as the GOLFCAMERA-01 need not be switched to RECORD ( by remote RF control ) until a few seconds before the actual club swing takes place then perhaps one hour of actual recording time is all that is needed.

 

The current conception of the GOLFCAM-01 is raw 12 -b per pixel at 640 X 512 @ 300 IPS -  7.28 seconds/GB  - this gives us 15.5 minutes of stored raw data on a proposed 128 GB of storage media.  To obtain a longer recording time we then add H.264 algorithm compression.  The ratio of the H.264 now depends on how much recording time we want and how much reduction in quality we can accept due to compression.  A H.264 ratio of 4:1 would give us the one hour.

 

Any advice from anybody?

 

Lee Tracey

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Instruction and Playing Tips
TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The Practice Range › Instruction and Playing Tips › Potential Analytical Golf Swing Camera