Linux Dash Camera

[jozsefbayton]

Hello DashCamTalk -
I am looking for a dash camera that runs Linux. I have searched high and low and cannot find any. This got me thinking - why are there none? Does anyone know of any? Is it because it is too hard to develop Linux on Ambarella/Novatek due to license restrictions? Why has no one developed on say Texas Instruments for a dash camera with Linux?

Any help or anyone who could point me in the right direction would be greatly appreciated.

Best,

Jozsef.

 

[Dashmellow]

The Mobius 2 action/dash camera runs on Linux based firmware. The camera does not have a Ambarella or Novatek processor. The Mobius 2 was not a highly successful product.

 

[jozsefbayton]

Thank you DashMellow. So the Ambarella/Novatek SDKs are just easier to deploy on so there is really no need to develop on Linux?

I would have thought there would have been more demand from users for Linux dash cameras with the flexibility Linux provides.

Thank you for your response.

Best,
Jozsef

 

[Dashmellow]

I think the reason may be that most DSP SDKs are not Linux based, hence you don't see it used too often. My understanding is that the Mobius developer wrote the M2 firmware more or less from scratch and ran into various challenges, partly related to the hardware.

 

[c4rc4m]

TBH there's little point in using an alternative OS unless it improves the picture quality, which I'd doubt it can do. Most dashcam pq limitations are hardware based.

 

[jokiin]

Ambarella chipsets support dual OS including Linux and it has some models out there that have used it, I don't think that has provided any advantages as such though

 

[impulsivetravelerguy]

I'm looking to build one from a Rapsberry Pi and commodity webcams. It would be running Raspbian. Would that qualify under what you're looking for?

 

[jozsefbayton]

Thank you all for the responses.

Ambarella chipsets support dual OS including Linux and it has some models out there that have used it, I don't think that has provided any advantages as such though

Interesting, but wouldn't Linux negate the need to wait for SDK updates from the manufacturer? In theory I can just install a library and off we go?

I'm looking to build one from a Rapsberry Pi and commodity webcams. It would be running Raspbian. Would that qualify under what you're looking for?

This would indeed - though webcams operated by USB won't have the quality or speed for recording data I would assume that CSI would?

TBH there's little point in using an alternative OS unless it improves the picture quality, which I'd doubt it can do. Most dashcam pq limitations are hardware based.

I would argue that it would give you far greater control over image quality as you in theory are not reliant upon a manufacturers SDK. If you built a camera around the Allwinner Quad H5 you could in theory have complete control over every aspect of the camera in the detail you wanted.

I understand linux drivers and a pain but I would have thought the pro's outweigh the cons for the control and you could actually allow the cameras to become more than just 'dash cameras'. Again this is just me spit balling, and thank you all very much for the comments. It is very insightful.

Best,

Jozsef

 

[jokiin]

Interesting, but wouldn't Linux negate the need to wait for SDK updates from the manufacturer? In theory I can just install a library and off we go?

that's the theory, I've yet to see it in practice though

 

[impulsivetravelerguy]

This would indeed - though webcams operated by USB won't have the quality or speed for recording data I would assume that CSI would?

I don't see why it wouldn't. You can get 4K USB webcams. You might have to use USB 3.0, but I don't see why there would be any issues. If anything, it would be the computer such as the Raspberry Pi that might be your bottleneck.

 

[jozsefbayton]

that's the theory, I've yet to see it in practice though

Ah - so it's kind of a pipedream for manufacturers like yourself to have this functionality but it is not worth it from your side to do it due to the convenience of the SDKs and the hassle of doing it yourself is too much with too much riding on it to take the gamble?

I don't see why it wouldn't. You can get 4K USB webcams. You might have to use USB 3.0, but I don't see why there would be any issues. If anything, it would be the computer such as the Raspberry Pi that might be your bottleneck.

I apologise I stand corrected. I'm assuming the size would not be an issue for you? Can you tweak the camera to your hearts content on the R-PI? As in theory R-PIs should allow a very quick and easy way to prototype Linux based dash cameras.

Thank you again for all your responses.

Best,

Jozsef.

 

[jokiin]

Ah - so it's kind of a pipedream for manufacturers like yourself to have this functionality but it is not worth it from your side to do it due to the convenience of the SDKs and the hassle of doing it yourself is too much with too much riding on it to take the gamble?
.

no pipedream, I don't see any advantage over the SDK we have now

 

[c4rc4m]

Thank you all for the responses.

I would argue that it would give you far greater control over image quality as you in theory are not reliant upon a manufacturers SDK. If you built a camera around the Allwinner Quad H5 you could in theory have complete control over every aspect of the camera in the detail you wanted.

You can but the image quality is ultimately hardware limited. There are already some people on here, notably BCHobbyist who are already provided up-rated firmware solutions. Ultimately, very few people, even on here are going to understand how to do the tweaks BC Hobbyist is making, so providing a custom firmware with total settings access is going to be useless to 99% of users. Beyond basic adjustments ie. contrast, brightness etc, 99% are going to be lost.

Even then, with those 1% who do understand technical tweaking such as BC Hobbyist, the question is could anyone less experienced achieve better tweaks than him? Even if you could, there are still the hardware limitations as to what you can achieve. On many cameras this comes down quite simply to the sensor's low light sensitivity and often it's related physical size, the lens, thermal considerations, the card reader, the chipset etc. No mount of software tweaking can overcome the limitations on the physical side. The best you can achieve is to optimise the picture within those limitations and that often takes an understanding greater than most possess to achieve any real difference.

 

[jokiin]

You can but the image quality is ultimately hardware limited. There are already some people on here, notably BCHobbyist who are already provided up-rated firmware solutions. Ultimately, very few people, even on here are going to understand how to do the tweaks BC Hobbyist is making, so providing a custom firmware with total settings access is going to be useless to 99% of users. Beyond basic adjustments ie. contrast, brightness etc, 99% are going to be lost.
.

@Falsificator is probably the best I've seen when it comes to firmware tweaks for image improvements, could he do better if it was Linux, probably not, if he had full access to the SDK he could probably do what he does now a lot easier though

 

[jozsefbayton]

no pipedream, I don't see any advantage over the SDK we have now

Wouldn't the advantage be adding features you want/optimizations you want rather than having to wait forthe SDK to be updated from often unreliable and cumbersome corporations?

You can but the image quality is ultimately hardware limited. There are already some people on here, notably BCHobbyist who are already provided up-rated firmware solutions. Ultimately, very few people, even on here are going to understand how to do the tweaks BC Hobbyist is making, so providing a custom firmware with total settings access is going to be useless to 99% of users. Beyond basic adjustments ie. contrast, brightness etc, 99% are going to be lost.

Even then, with those 1% who do understand technical tweaking such as BC Hobbyist, the question is could anyone less experienced achieve better tweaks than him? Even if you could, there are still the hardware limitations as to what you can achieve. On many cameras this comes down quite simply to the sensor's low light sensitivity and often it's related physical size, the lens, thermal considerations, the card reader, the chipset etc. No mount of software tweaking can overcome the limitations on the physical side. The best you can achieve is to optimise the picture within those limitations and that often takes an understanding greater than most possess to achieve any real difference.

I do apologise - I should have been clearer - I was looking at this from a manufacturers perspective, not a consumer perspective. Your points are completely valid for a consumer.

From a manufacturers side - the Linux provides the flexibility to operate how you want to, rather than waiting for SDK updates. such, if you want to add 'parking' support, you can now easily add this via a firmware update or even an Linux application update to provide this. Compare that to the current system which is waiting for a SDK update (this is just an example not to be taken literally). The control you get an embedded linux level is far greater than through a SDK as so to speak 'the system is yours'.

Again, thank you for your responses - this is thoroughly interesting!

Best,

Jozsef.

 

[jozsefbayton]

@Falsificator is probably the best I've seen when it comes to firmware tweaks for image improvements, could he do better if it was Linux, probably not, if he had full access to the SDK he could probably do what he does now a lot easier though

And wouldn't that be the advantage of a Linux camera? That it is easier to improve as the manufacturer has complete control over the camera. Whether or not if that is passed on to the consumer is a different argument, but manufacturers like you then do not have to wait or struggle with SDK roadblocks.

Best,

Jozsef.

 

[jokiin]

Wouldn't the advantage be adding features you want/optimizations you want rather than having to wait for the SDK to be updated from often unreliable and cumbersome corporations?
.

no, not for us, that may be true of other platforms though

From a manufacturers side - the Linux provides the flexibility to operate how you want to, rather than waiting for SDK updates. such, if you want to add 'parking' support, you can now easily add this via a firmware update or even an Linux application update to provide this. Compare that to the current system which is waiting for a SDK update (this is just an example not to be taken literally). The control you get an embedded linux level is far greater than through a SDK as so to speak 'the system is yours'.
.

the Mobius M2 is proof that this doesn't pan out in reality, very experienced devs when working with the SDK's yet they failed some of the basics when they decided to switch to Linux, hypothetically the control is greater, but so is the responsibility of what you then have to make work

 

[jozsefbayton]

the Mobius M2 is proof that this doesn't pan out in reality, very experienced devs when working with the SDK's yet they failed some of the basics when they decided to switch to Linux, hypothetically the control is greater, but so is the responsibility of what you then have to make work

From what I can tell regarding Mobius 2 (M2) is that they tried to create an embedded linux from the ground up rather than using an available supported updated embedded linux. Furthermore, they seemed to try and put all the functions into the embedded linux rather than saying creating a camera application that would have allowed far further stability and usability.

Would you argue that the M2s issues and image quality issues were directly attributable to them trying to run a version of Linux? Or a combination of poor hardware and poor software?

Again - thank you for the responses.

Best,
Jozsef

 

[jokiin]

I have no insight as to how they set Linux up, the same hardware runs fine in other cameras using the provided SDK so I don't see it as a hardware limitation

 

[jozsefbayton]

I have no insight as to how they set Linux up, the same hardware runs fine in other cameras using the provided SDK so I don't see it as a hardware limitation

Ah - so it seems to have been a Linux issue. I can understand why they tried to do what they did, it just seems very poorly executed. Is their hardware public knowledge as I would love to compare their camera with a camera with similar hardware but with the software created in the SDK.

Ambarella chipsets support dual OS including Linux and it has some models out there that have used it.

It's also been mentioned previously that some other cameras are running Linux today - what cameras are these and have they found success? And is the Linux provided still operating with Ambarella's SDK?

Thank you for your responses - they're most helpful.

Best,

Jozsef

Edited: Updated formatting.