Imagine if Viofio etc Videos Were This Clear

My first "dash cam" was an old Panasonic MiniDV camcorder
Well would you look at that, my first Dashcam was a Panasonic palm sized video camera too.
 
Thinking about your comments a bit further, I have a few thoughts.

My first "dash cam" was an old Panasonic MiniDV camcorder secured to my dashboard with a big wad of BluTak.

My first real dash cam was a generic model from China called an A-20. It offered 1080p resolution at a time when many dash cams on the market back then were still only 720p. Back in those days there were really no North America vendors selling dash cams. If you wanted a dash cam you needed to order directly from China. One of those vendors was an outlet known as Foxoffer who offered a range of generic cams and their own clones of some Chinese "brand" name dash cams, along with other consumer electronics. Foxoffer eventually began manufacturing and selling their own brand name line of cameras and they are now known as Viofo (and GitUp). FoxxOffer as an online retail vendor no longer exists.

Anyway, when I first got the A20 I was amazed by the performance of the camera. Back then I had never before owned a video camera that could produce 1080p clips and this was a huge improvident over my old Panasonic camcorder. The camera came with a mini HDMI cable and I recall plugging it into my flat panel TV and being blown away by the first footage I shot. By today's standards however the video was poor. The bit rate was minimal and you would often see pixelization in the images. The dynamic range was poor. WDR did not exist yet. All in all I was very happy to have the capabilities this camera provided to me but like ALL dash cams back in those days it was USELESS at night. The very best one could expect was a very grainy image a few yards in front of bright headlights and nothing more. The camera had two white LEDs for illumination which were totally useless but you could easily slide the camera from its mount and use it as a hand-held camera which could come in handy if you had a fender bender and wanted to capture the damage from outside your vehicle. Like many dash cams back then this one was not 100% reliable. Sometimes, for no apparent reason you would get home and discover that it stopped recording somewhere during your journey and I spent a lot of time and energy fiddling with the cables making sure I had a good connection.

The A-20 camera itself was pretty interesting. It had a flip down tilt-table screen with control buttons and it ran on a replaceable cell phone battery. I bought this one because it was stealthier than most cams of that era that had chrome and splashy logos on them whereas this one was all black. There was no way to know what processor or sensor was in it. It took a maximum 32GB memory card. You just had to pick one and hope for the best.

So, I don't know if you could call it a "snails pace" but dash camera technology has sure come a long way in my time with them and each iteration adds improvements, features and new capabilities. My current A119 V3s compared to my A-20 from 12 years ago are from different worlds.

The A-20 dash cam. You can still find it online! (the one I had came with a much stealthier mount)
View attachment 60989
Right on,
Thanks for the trip down memory lane. Lol
My snail’s pace reference was a “dig” at the microwave generation.

“You know what the problem with instant gratification is? It takes too long!”
-George Carlin
LMAO

I want 4K60fps on a 5 channel system, (front, rear, left, right, IR interior) with the main guts of the system remotely located under the seat / in glove box / trunk etc. so the only thing you see are the time 2001 Space Odyssey “eyes” mounted on the windows. And I want parking mode to run off a solar panel, in lieu of a dash cam battery pack. Lol
-Chuck
 
...old timers here on DCT who all started out using camcorders as dash cams back in the day...
Canon S3-IS wedged up against the windshield here. Just checked the videos I happened to save and just about any current dash cam can do much better.
 
Canon S3-IS wedged up against the windshield here. Just checked the videos I happened to save and just about any current dash cam can do much better.
Cool! Yet another!

Might have to start a poll and see how many DCT members chime in about this.

There was definitely an urge to record "dash cam" video even before today's technology became available.

Yes, you are quite right. Camcorder dash cam video was no match for today's dash cam performance.
 
Last edited:
You do not need "flash illumination" with a global shutter to make use of its benefits!
You do if you want to avoid motion blur, you don't if you only want to avoid motion distortion/artifacts.

In your example images the global shutter image does not have less motion blur on the writing, if anything it is more motion blurred, which is the most likely result since global shutter sensors generally have less sensitivity than rolling shutter, although the difference is declining with the newest multilayer sensors. With dashcams, higher sensitivity is more important than a little motion distortion, hence dashcams always using rolling shutter sensors so far. Given one or two more generations of image sensor, rolling shutter may become obsolete for the higher quality image sensors, there will be no reason to use it when HDR is built into the image sensor itself.
 
You do if you want to avoid motion blur, you don't if you only want to avoid motion distortion/artifacts.

In your example images the global shutter image does not have less motion blur on the writing, if anything it is more motion blurred, which is the most likely result since global shutter sensors generally have less sensitivity than rolling shutter, although the difference is declining with the newest multilayer sensors. With dashcams, higher sensitivity is more important than a little motion distortion, hence dashcams always using rolling shutter sensors so far. Given one or two more generations of image sensor, rolling shutter may become obsolete for the higher quality image sensors, there will be no reason to use it when HDR is built into the image sensor itself.

The short video was merely a simple demonstration of the difference between a global shutter and a rolling one.

I find it amusing that you ignored the entire rest of my post which disputed your sarcastic assertion that global shutters are only used for machine vision and require stroboscopic flash illumination to freeze motion. For one thing Sony's Pregius class sensors (a huge family of 38 products) are far more capable than you give them credit for.

From my first comments about these sensors at no time did I suggest that we will be seeing global shutters in dash cams any time soon.

Nevertheless, the rapid evolution of this type of sensor portends interesting future developments as these global shutter sensors migrate beyond the field of industrial machine vision into other arenas. Their enhanced light gathering sensitivity, fast frame rates and their inherent ability to reduce or eliminate motion blur have already led to their use in license plate capture, traffic monitoring, aerial capture (drones), medical and scientific imaging, surveillance cameras and other applications. There is every reason to believe that this growth trend is just beginning.

I initially brought up the idea of new advanced sensors making their way into dash cams as part of the discussion of the "snails pace" of dash camera development and the idea that a company like Sony is one of the few corporations that possesses the wherewithal to leverage their expertise in sensor development into exciting future consumer products. This notion has been echoed by many industry experts who have been commenting on the most recent generation of the Pregius sensors.

Of course, as always, you present yourself as an authority and final word on literally every subject regardless of the facts or what actual experts in their fields have to say on any given subject.

Given one or two more generations of image sensor, rolling shutter may become obsolete for the higher quality image sensors, there will be no reason to use it when HDR is built into the image sensor itself.

FYI, Pregius sensors are already available with dual frame HDR capabilities implemented into the sensor itself and while not suitable for dash cam use or consumer products some of these sensors are designed for standard video capture which Sony describes as blur free color image captures at standard video frame rates. There is no reason not to believe that this technology will eventually find its way from industry and technical use to consumer products.

global.jpg
 
Last edited:
Global shutters do NOTHING to reduce motion blur, only shorter exposures can do that. Global shutters are great at eliminating geometric distortion caused by motion.

A flash reduces exposure time to the length of time the flash is illuminated. A flash will work with a rolling shutter as long as the exposure time is longer than the time it takes for the rolling shutter to make a complete pass, and the flash is timed to when all pixels are active. This is how film cameras with focal plain shutters worked with a flash, the exposure time had to be longer than 1/60th of a second so that the shutter was fully open at the time of the flash, otherwise only part of the frame would be illuminated.

Marketing people quite often do not fully understand what they are marketing. I never trust the glossy documents put out by the marketing department. I have too many times seen horrendously wrong claims in the marketing material of many products. It is unlikely that the marketing people understood the difference between geometric distortion and motion blur, and thought they were the same thing.
 
From my first comments about these sensors at no time did I suggest that we will be seeing global shutters in dash cams any time soon.
Are you suggesting that we won't?

Their enhanced light gathering sensitivity, fast frame rates and their inherent ability to reduce or eliminate motion blur have already led to their use in license plate capture, traffic monitoring, aerial capture (drones), medical and scientific imaging, surveillance cameras and other applications. There is every reason to believe that this growth trend is just beginning.
They have been around for many years and are well established, this is not "just the beginning"!
They do not have enhanced light gathering sensitivity, the STARVIS sensors that we use in our dashcams are the more sensitive.
They do not eliminate motion blur, they have no effect on motion blur, unless used with flash lighting.
Yes, they are used by ANPR, where they are used with flash illumination.
Yes, they are used in drones, where rolling shutter distortion can be a serious problem for vision based navigation, and also for high resolution survey work due to vibration issues.
I think they are used in endoscopes because of bad rolling shutter distortion which is caused by the use of very slow frame rates.
They are not normally used for surveillance cameras, that is what STARVIS was developed for, and that, as we know, uses rolling shutters.

FYI, Pregius sensors are already available with dual frame HDR capabilities implemented into the sensor itself
You say that and then include an image that says the HDR exposures are "externally merged", not done by the sensor itself!
 
...Marketing people quite often do not fully understand what they are marketing. I never trust the glossy documents put out by the marketing department. I have too many times seen horrendously wrong claims in the marketing material of many products. It is unlikely that the marketing people understood the difference between geometric distortion and motion blur, and thought they were the same thing.
+1
 
A flash will work with a rolling shutter as long as the exposure time is longer than the time it takes for the rolling shutter to make a complete pass, and the flash is timed to when all pixels are active.
Normally with rolling shutter sensors, there is no time when all pixels are active, the pixels become active as the "shutter rolls past", so with a short flash, most pixels will not see the flash at all and you just get a bar of illumination at some point down the image. So a flash with a rolling shutter camera needs to be long enough for a complete scan of the sensor, which means that the flash can't be fast enough to reduce motion blur at all. With a global shutter sensor you can have the flash time as short as you want, as long as it is bright enough to provide decent exposure in that time.

There is an exception with rolling shutter cameras, if either flash is your only source of light or, as in a DSLR, you also have a mechanical shutter, then you can activate the whole sensor and have a short flash, then after the flash you have to ensure no more light arrives before the pixels are read.
 
Are you suggesting that we won't?

That's correct! We won't be seeing global shutters in dash cams any time soon, especially the Pregius family.

The whole point here, that you continue to ignore was my initial speculation that we will eventually see new types of sensors in dash cams and consumer video cams including global shutters and that a company like Sony would be the ideal candidate to make that happen.

They do not have enhanced light gathering sensitivity, the STARVIS sensors that we use in our dashcams are the more sensitive.

STARVIS and Pregius are both highly sensitive back-illuminated sensors but again, I was not saying anybody is going to put a Pregius sensor in a dash cam, I was speculating about the possibility of Sony eventually developing a global shutter sensor optimized for dash cams that does not currently exist. We were discussing possible future dash cam developments. All this nitpicking about the Pregius sensor actually being used in a dash cam is ridiculous as I never suggested that.

They are not normally used for surveillance cameras, that is what STARVIS was developed for, and that, as we know, uses rolling shutters.

Obviously you weren't paying attention when I brought this up previously but SONY is specifically marketing the Pregius sensor for use in CCTV cameras both for its global shutter and its ability to capture images with "starlight sensitivity".
They also mention license plate capture.

pregius.jpg

They go on to discuss other benefits of the Pregius family of sensors for use in surveillance cameras.

"Amazing image quality can be had with highly sensitive, large capacity pixels that provide wide dynamic range image captures of drivers and license plates for tolling or law enforcement. These ensure reliable, clear images, even under challenging light conditions, that ensure accurate detection and reading of number plates even under challenging conditions such as reflections, shadows, and direct sunlight."

" NIR sensitivity is increased with the deep pixel wells of the Pregius technology architectures, making them especially interesting for outdoor, nighttime applications, especially if combined with NIR light sources."

Just because something is outside your frame of reference Nigel, like global shutters implemented in CCTV cameras doesn't mean it is not viable or doesn't exist.

they do not eliminate motion blur, they have no effect on motion blur, unless used with flash lighting

Using the example of recording athletes or animals, SONY states:

"High frame rates enable accurate analyses of physical processes as well as the fine movements from athletes or animals. Slow motion replays are more intriguing with higher frame rates and global shutters to completely stop motion in each video frame with less blur and distortion."

Obviously they wouldn't make such claims if they couldn't deliver on them, even if it is "less blur" and "less distortion". And with surveillance cameras or filming athletics they are certainly not using strobe lights.

You say that and then include an image that says the HDR exposures are "externally merged", not done by the sensor itself!

Well of course not! It is a sensor, not a processor.

What they are saying is that the sensor has an optional dedicated 2 frame HDR capture mode built into that sends both frames to the processor.

I think you argue for the sake of arguing, not because you have anything worthwhile to add to the discussion. It's a tired old pattern as this point.
 
There is an exception with rolling shutter cameras, if either flash is your only source of light or, as in a DSLR, you also have a mechanical shutter, then you can activate the whole sensor and have a short flash, then after the flash you have to ensure no more light arrives before the pixels are read.

Well, flash synchronization is the tool that is used and it's been around for a very long time. Flash synchronization even works with focal plane shutters which were the original "rolling shutters" back in the day. The difference with digital global shutters is the ability to function at very high speeds.
 
Well of course not! It is a sensor, not a processor.

What they are saying is that the sensor has an optional dedicated 2 frame HDR capture mode built into that sends both frames to the processor.

I think you argue for the sake of arguing, not because you have anything worthwhile to add to the discussion. It's a tired old pattern as this point.
So far, processor based HDR has not worked well, I want a sensor based HDR, and it is not really a future technology since Sony are already selling the IMX490 with its 120db dynamic range and zero ghosting:

That's not quite what we want for dashcams though since it will not produce sharp, motion blur free number plates despite the excellent ghost free HDR!
And note that Sony choose to use rolling shutter for their flagship automotive sensor!

For dashcams we need a Starvis 3 sensor, which isn't available yet, but it is now the next generation, so may not be too far away.
 
So far, processor based HDR has not worked well, I want a sensor based HDR, and it is not really a future technology since Sony are already selling the IMX490 with its 120db dynamic range and zero ghosting:

That's not quite what we want for dashcams though since it will not produce sharp, motion blur free number plates despite the excellent ghost free HDR!
And note that Sony choose to use rolling shutter for their flagship automotive sensor!

For dashcams we need a Starvis 3 sensor, which isn't available yet, but it is now the next generation, so may not be too far away.

First, your argument was that there would be no reason to use global shutters when HDR is built directly into the sensor

there will be no reason to use it when HDR is built into the image sensor itself.

When I then pointed out that the Pregius units already have HDR incorporated into the functionality of the sensors (and have for several generations) you skipped right over that and moved the goalposts once again, arguing that it is "externally merged".

HDR exposures are "externally merged", not done by the sensor itself!

When I pointed out the obvious fact that it is merely "a sensor, not a processor", but nevertheless a sensor that is designed to capture two HDR images and forward them to the processor you moved the goalposts yet again.

So, now you make the unfounded claim that "processor based HDR has not worked well" based entirely on the fact that a single processor manufactured by Novatek has exhibited issues implementing HDR in a single brand of dash cam. Dismissing a whole technology across the entire industry because a single chipset manufacturer other than SONY has had issues implementing HDR with one of their products is like throwing the baby out with the bathwater!

Once again Nigel, you ignored almost the entirety of my last response to your commentary in favor of your entirely unfounded opinions, assertions and non sequitur detours away from the original discussion.

It is irrelevant what SONY has done in the past. That is not what we were discussing! We have no idea what sensor designs they may introduce in the coming years. Conceivably they could introduce a future STARVIS sensor with a global shutter.

Meanwhile, the sensor industry is already moving in this direction because rolling shutters are a flawed technology that needs updating. The fact that global shutters are being introduced into surveillance cameras suggests that they will migrate into other products as time goes by and that process has already begun. There is already some discussion in the photography and videography press about the future potential for global shutter sensors. In fact, Canon announced development of global shutter with dual in-pixel memory HDR three years ago!. And FYI, Canon introduced their flagship EOS C700 Digital Cinema Camera in Super35 format with a global shutter sensor some time ago, so a global sensor high end cinematography camera is already available.

Both the Pergius and STARVIS back illuminated sensors share a technical and design heritage and we don't know how that overlap may or may not influence future SONY sensor products. Clearly global shutters are no longer just for machine vision.

I don't know why you chronically engage in these endless circular arguments that are nothing more than a distraction and seem once again to be argument for the sake of arguing. Why else would you keep changing the subject and moving the goalposts further and further away from the original discussion? It always comes down to you presenting yourself as the ultimate authority on literally every subject whether you know what you are talking about or not and it really does get rather tiresome.

I think you argue for the sake of arguing, not because you have anything worthwhile to add to the discussion. It's a tired old pattern as this point.
 
Last edited:
Obviously they wouldn't make such claims if they couldn't deliver on them,
You are making it clear that you have never met a marketing person.

The description of the sensor you are referring to mentions it is very light sensitive. This allows short exposures, and the short exposure is what minimizes motion blur, NOT the global shutter.
 
You are making it clear that you have never met a marketing person.

The description of the sensor you are referring to mentions it is very light sensitive. This allows short exposures, and the short exposure is what minimizes motion blur, NOT the global shutter.

SONY is not marketing these sensors to clueless consumer electronics customers. They are marketing to companies building high end machine vision systems and specialized surveillance cameras. I seriously doubt the engineers designing these systems and making purchasing decisions would fall for hyperbole and hype from SONY.

Both global shutter and high sensitivity are factors that contribute to better visual acuity in video capture.
 
Last edited:
...Camcorder dash cam video was no match for today's dash cam performance.
Absolutely true. Between the 640x480 resolution, in camera I.S. causing 'swimming', and less than ideal mounting (just wedged against the windshield) causing vibration in spite of the I.S. the result left a lot to be desired. Forget trying to get a plate number unless you're directly behind a vehicle and not moving, Certainly makes 1080 resolution and a solid mount look really good.

Video circa Oct. '08.

 
Last edited:
Absolutely true. Between the 640x480 resolution, in camera I.S. causing 'swimming', and less than ideal mounting (just wedged against the windshield) causing vibration in spite of the I.S. the result left a lot to be desired. Forget trying to get a plate number unless you're directly behind a vehicle and not moving, Certainly makes 1080 resolution look really good.

Video circa Oct. '08.


Yeah, absolutely true for sure. My camcorder dash cam efforts were back around that time period from maybe late 2008 to 2010 when I finally purchased my first real dash cam.

Despite the flaws, yours doesn't look all that bad compared to some of what I captured back then. I sometimes got combing effects depending upon which monitor I tried to watch the interlaced video on. I hadn't yet figured out de-interlacing.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top