[HN Gopher] Best RealSense replacements?
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Best RealSense replacements?
        
       Author : paulkrush
       Score  : 73 points
       Date   : 2021-08-18 18:16 UTC (4 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (github.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (github.com)
        
       | spencerflem wrote:
       | Realsense cameras were cool, it's a shame to see them go :(
        
       | KiDD wrote:
       | I hope development continues as an open source project. I just
       | got an Intel L515 not that long ago and it is pretty great!
        
       | grawp wrote:
       | Is there some GPU or FPGA opensource implementation of depth
       | camera comparable to RealSense in quality of its output?
       | 
       | I've seen many projects that call themself opensource while
       | utilizing RealSense and I always scream internally how can they
       | call themself opensource when absolute most of the work is being
       | done by nongeneric and essential/irreplacable piece of
       | proprietary technology.
        
       | helge9210 wrote:
       | I haven't used these specific cameras, but enjoyed working with
       | the company as client.
       | 
       | https://en.ids-imaging.com/ensenso-stereo-3d-camera.html
        
         | bsenftner wrote:
         | Like you, I have used other cameras from this company, and I'd
         | say they know what they are doing. Probably worth checking out.
        
           | walterbell wrote:
           | Any idea on retail pricing, e.g. is there a comparable model
           | to RealSense? There's no obvious "Buy" button on the site.
        
       | lockless wrote:
       | I have been using Intel's D-435i for 6D object Pose estimation
       | and i have to say i was not really happy with the quality of the
       | retrieved depth-frames. The Depth images are very noisy, flat
       | surfaces appear heavily wavy thus making it difficult to apply it
       | for tasks that demand a relatively exact 3D representation of the
       | surrounding Space, which is a problem that has been mentioned in
       | a few issues by several other clients. Just Google ghost noise or
       | wavyy Noise D-435i.
       | 
       | Moreover the AI implementier is actually Not really AI, it's just
       | a bunch of common filters for depth-noise reduction such as a
       | Median filter, just look up the filters. And lastly the depth-
       | measurement becomes more unexact the further the point is away,
       | therefore making it necessary to apply a depth-correction, in my
       | case a correction polynom of 2nd Order.
       | 
       | All in all i have to say i'd not use it again, especially not in
       | industrial contexts. The Kinectv2 delivers a much more stable and
       | reliable depth-image, Even though the realsense programming
       | Interface is mostly nice to work with.
        
         | flyinglizard wrote:
         | The L515 is AFAIK based on scanning MEMS rather than structured
         | light on the 435 and together with its integrated "normal"
         | camera should give better results (did for us).
        
         | paulkrush wrote:
         | I second the L515 as it's much cleaner then the D435(if you
         | need this). That being said the L515 is not like scanning
         | LiDAR, but it's great tool at the price point.
        
       | lucb1e wrote:
       | I'm out of this loop, why is it gone? Clicking on the repo it
       | seems perfectly active, last release was a few days ago. The repo
       | is not archived, the readme doesn't mention it's deprecated.
       | What's going on here?
        
         | a-dub wrote:
         | i remember in 2020 they were running a pretty aggressive ad
         | campaign that made me think "hmm. they seem starved for
         | applications."
        
         | dheera wrote:
         | Intel EOLed RealSense
         | 
         | https://www.crn.com/news/components-peripherals/intel-says-i...
         | 
         | https://www.theverge.com/2021/8/17/22629528/intel-realsense-...
         | 
         | It's typical Intel behavior, they LOVE to EOL products with
         | only sudden notice and not a milligram of effort to try to sell
         | the business to someone who will maintain it.
        
           | PaulHoule wrote:
           | I think depth cameras haven't really taken off.
           | 
           | One issue is that, with neural networks, you can accomplish
           | many things a depth camera can do without the depth camera.
           | 
           | For instance you can train a neural network to guess at a
           | depth field for a scene. It's not going to deal with
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ames_room
           | 
           | but it is good enough for many purposes. Similarly you can
           | train a neural network to separate the speaker on a video
           | call from the background, so you just don't need a depth
           | camera.
           | 
           | On top of that people just haven't found applications for
           | depth cameras that are all that compelling. I guess "Windows
           | Hello" uses something like a depth camera but that creates a
           | strong incentive for the camera's functionality not be
           | exposed to the end user because if you can see what the
           | camera sees you are in a much better place to abuse it.
           | 
           | The other thing is that depth cameras just haven't gotten
           | better from a practical point of view. On paper the XBOX One
           | Kinect is a lot better than the original Kinect but in
           | practice it doesn't perform any better.
        
             | porphyra wrote:
             | Real depth cameras perform better and cost far less than
             | the $1500 GPU that you're going to need to run the
             | monocular depth network. Monocular depth still struggles to
             | generalize to environments that are even slightly different
             | from the training set.
             | 
             | Try git cloning niantic labs' monodepth2 (or whatever is
             | the state of the art on Papers with Code) and running it on
             | your living room. It's not good.
             | 
             | https://github.com/nianticlabs/monodepth2
             | 
             | https://paperswithcode.com/task/monocular-depth-estimation
        
             | sleepybrett wrote:
             | There is a depth camera in every new iphone.
        
             | dheera wrote:
             | > Similarly you can train a neural network to separate the
             | speaker on a video call from the background, so you just
             | don't need a depth camera.
             | 
             | These still look so fake, and they tend to blur out objects
             | that you're trying to hold up in the video, that I actually
             | created my own virtual camera that blurs progressively more
             | over depths based on RealSense measured depth and looks far
             | more realistic.
             | 
             | https://github.com/dheera/bokeh-camera
        
               | PaulHoule wrote:
               | They're not that good but people will tolerate poor
               | quality.
        
         | fxtentacle wrote:
         | https://siliconangle.com/2021/08/17/intel-shutting-realsense...
        
       | porphyra wrote:
       | The Kinect Azure outperforms the RealSense devices.
       | 
       | There are also devices based on the Infineon lidar, such as the
       | pieye Nimbus 3D camera.
        
         | ansgri wrote:
         | There are also ToF cameras from Basler, we have their early
         | model, and it works reasonably well, though hot and rather
         | power-hungry. Based on that experience, their current models
         | look promising:
         | https://www.baslerweb.com/en/products/cameras/3d-cameras/
        
         | croes wrote:
         | Does the Kinect 2 still outperform the Azure Kinect at body
         | tracking?
         | 
         | https://github.com/microsoft/Azure-Kinect-Sensor-SDK/issues/...
        
         | awal2 wrote:
         | I've worked with these (Azure Kinect), and they are quite nice,
         | but they are much bigger and heavier and require a lot more
         | power.
        
         | paulkrush wrote:
         | I just called for Kinect Azure and they told me Oct 2022 for
         | next stock. Thanks I will have too look into the Infineon
         | lidar. I'm guessing Velabit is a chipageddon story as well.
        
           | hallway_monitor wrote:
           | Sorry to hear about the Kinect delay. The device works very
           | well in my experience.
        
             | sleepybrett wrote:
             | also very very expensive.
        
       | ilaksh wrote:
       | Take a look at the Stereolabs Zed cameras.
        
         | fxtentacle wrote:
         | But be aware that they are rolling shutter and only barely
         | synchronized.
        
         | dheera wrote:
         | Zed sucks, they eat into your GPU instead of on-board ASIC so
         | you have no GPU left to do neural nets or anything else.
         | 
         | RealSense on the other hand does computations on-board and
         | consumes very little CPU and no GPU.
        
         | krasin wrote:
         | Zed cameras has a very hostile EULA (borderline illegal, but
         | IANAL), I would not recommend using them unless it's absolutely
         | the only option.
        
           | ansgri wrote:
           | Didn't know about that, could you point at specific bad
           | parts?
        
             | krasin wrote:
             | Here is the license as of today:
             | 
             | ``` <...> 2. License
             | 
             | a. The Software is licensed to You, not sold. You are
             | licensed to use the Software only as downloaded from the
             | stereolabs.com website, and updated by STEREOLABS from time
             | to time. You may not copy or reverse engineer the Software.
             | b. As conditions to this Software license, You agree that:
             | i.      You will use Your Software with ZED, ZED 2 or ZED
             | Mini camera only and not with any other device (including).
             | You will not use Unauthorized Accessories. They may not
             | work or may stop working permanently after a Software
             | update.                  ii.     You will not use or
             | install any Unauthorized Software with an Authorized
             | Accessory. If You do, Your ZED, ZED 2 or ZED Mini camera
             | may stop working permanently at that time or after a later
             | Software update.                  iii.    You will not
             | attempt to defeat or circumvent any Software technical
             | limitation, security, or anti-piracy system. If You do,
             | Your ZED, ZED 2 or ZED Mini camera may stop working
             | permanently at that time or after a later Software update.
             | iv.     STEREOLABS may use technical measures, including
             | Software updates, to limit use of the Software to the ZED,
             | ZED 2 or ZED Mini camera, to prevent use of Unauthorized
             | Accessories, and to protect the technical limitations,
             | security and anti-piracy systems in the ZED, ZED 2 or ZED
             | Mini camera.                  v.      STEREOLABS may update
             | the Software from time to time without further notice to
             | You, for example, to update any technical limitation,
             | security, or anti-piracy system.
             | 
             | <...> ```
             | 
             | The problem with this license (beyond the fact that they
             | are restricting a lot of user freedom) is that it's not
             | specific. For instance, it's unclear if improving depth
             | quality by applying an extra median filter is a violation
             | of iii as it eliminates a technical limitation.
             | 
             | While I don't expect them to actually go after their users,
             | the fact that EULA is so hostile was the reason we can't
             | use it in our team.
        
         | ansgri wrote:
         | My company uses ZEDs now, and we are planning to use their new
         | models which are weatherproof, and they currently seem to be
         | the only inexpensive option for outdoor sensing that works out
         | of box. And we don't like them: need your own GPU (at least
         | they support Jetson & co.), not enough SW flexibility, USB-only
         | connection limits the cable length.
         | 
         | Longer-term, we plan to use our own software with either a pair
         | of conventional machine vision cameras, or, preferably, find
         | some ready-made assembly of a pair of cameras + SoC with full
         | user programmability since we like to be in control of our
         | perception algorithms.
        
           | michaelt wrote:
           | You can make extra-long USB connections with USB-over-fibre
           | products like [1] (if you've got the money)
           | 
           | [1] https://www.amazon.co.uk/FIBBR-Cable-Female-Active-
           | Extension...
        
       | r2_pilot wrote:
       | I've really enjoyed using Luxonis's OAK-D camera. First
       | Kickstarter I've gotten, and does what they said it would. They
       | have a very active Discord channel as well.
        
         | krasin wrote:
         | Sounds interesting, thanks for sharing.
         | 
         | How is the quality compared to RealSense? Do I understand
         | correctly that OAK-D camera requires two cables (USB-C and
         | barrel jack power), not just one?
        
           | r2_pilot wrote:
           | I can't directly compare quality as I've not used Realsense
           | devices, but the main difference is that the OAK-D uses
           | stereoscopy without IR. I've been playing with it in various
           | light conditions and it's surprisingly robust in low light as
           | long as features are visible in both cameras. It only
           | requires 1 USB-C cable if you're using it over USB3(i.e. a
           | device that can source >1A iirc). I use it with a Jetson
           | Nano(albeit not to its full capacity-yet) with just the USB.
        
       | dang wrote:
       | Recent and related:
       | 
       |  _Intel is giving up on its AI-powered RealSense cameras_ -
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28218354 - Aug 2021 (10
       | comments)
        
       | fxtentacle wrote:
       | Your best bet is probably to order cheap IR or color industrial
       | cameras and use stereo block matching. It's implemented in OpenCV
       | and works okay-ish. For example, Basler dart USB3 cameras can be
       | synchronized through the IO expension port.
       | 
       | That said, maybe it's time for someone to produce a good
       | replacement. In my opinion, the RealSense was always quite pricey
       | when compared with what it could do, especially now that we can
       | just run AI algorithms on the edge.
        
         | onedognight wrote:
         | There is no way this is a replacement for the RealSense depth
         | cameras. These are USB, bus powered, factory calibrated,
         | cameras doing the block matching in an ASIC. Often with an IR
         | projector to help the matching. This like saying, oh well, I
         | can't find a GPU, so I'll just compile Mesa for the CPU and my
         | product will be fine.
        
           | fxtentacle wrote:
           | Put an NVIDIA Jetson Nano in between and you also have
           | hardware matching.
           | 
           | IR projector is $19: https://www2.mouser.com/ProductDetail/am
           | s/AQAA-20?qs=DRkmTr7...
        
             | gary_0 wrote:
             | That one only has 4700 dots, which severely limits the
             | potential applications. The one in the iPhone face scanner
             | has 30,000 dots. (Last time I looked, it was very hard to
             | source IR projectors that you could use to make a
             | reasonably accurate depth camera.)
        
             | WJW wrote:
             | This seems a little bit like claiming that while you can't
             | deliver an aircraft carrier right now, you do have several
             | canoes available and since they both float it's basically
             | the same thing.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | spieswl wrote:
       | Incoming hearsay, but I've heard conflicting things from
       | RealSense integrators on what Intel is actually doing with this
       | product over the longer term. Someone mentioned that ongoing R&D
       | is being shuttered, but the depth camera product would still be
       | available for purchase for a while. It would be nice to get some
       | more clarity on what's actually happening.
        
         | paulkrush wrote:
         | This kind of makes sense as bigger customers would have to have
         | some sort of availability contract. I guess we just have to
         | wait for statements. Realsense cameras that are not being
         | developed, but promised to be available for purchase for 5-10
         | years might still be better than anything else out there, or at
         | least to bridge us through the chipageddon gap. Does Realsense
         | see the threat of 3D image sensors/solid state/flash LiDARs
         | taking over and are bailing out early? I guess if this was the
         | case why not just keep the L515 LiDAR?
        
           | dbcurtis wrote:
           | Intel is notorious for not giving reasonable EOL notices nor
           | last-buy opportunities. I don't trust them as a supplier. I
           | would not make the assumption that customers were treated
           | well. Until I hear from my contacts, I assume nothing.
           | (Source: worked at Intel for 11 years. Later worked at
           | customers that got gored by this practice a couple of times.)
        
       | gary_0 wrote:
       | Structure Core? https://structure.io/structure-core
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-08-18 23:01 UTC)