Blogs

The end of gimbals?

Posted by Joe Renteria on March 6, 2014 at 1:00pm

xn4zs3.jpg


I know that gimbals are really cool and make great things possible, but I just can't wait for them to die. They are heavy, draggy and add complexity. It would be great to just record everything and then scroll to the portion on video you want to see. If you are capturing video for a production, you can fix it in post. If you are doing surveillance, you could completely stabilize your view with software. Maybe this will get us one step closer:
http://bit.ly/1gV7n2c

Tags: gimbals
E-mail me when people leave their comments –
Follow

You need to be a member of diydrones to add comments!

Join diydrones

Comments

  • Quadzimodo May 5, 2014 at 5:21am

    Thanks Joe! Very cool!

  • Joe Renteria May 5, 2014 at 2:27am
    360 degrees of 4k in a compact package:
    https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1307511016/centr-interactive-p...
    CENTR: Interactive Panoramic Video in the Palm of Your Hand
    CENTR generates 360° HD video in real time on a device that fits in your pocket. Pledge $199 or more and get a FREE waterproof case!
  • Jonathan Price March 8, 2014 at 3:00pm

    @R_Lefebvre:

    The closest thing available to hobbyists is the Panono, but it currently only takes stills. I can't imagine the CPU that can capture video at 108 megapixels and still launch in my Bixler.

  • Quadzimodo March 8, 2014 at 12:05pm

    Rob - Yeah, his type of camera really needs a Curvilinear Image Sensor.

    But as you say John, low noise, high contrast and low light performance calls for more glass and a larger sensor with bigger photo buckets/diodes.

  • Rob_Lefebvre March 8, 2014 at 6:57am

    What if they make a spherical imager chip?  Wouldn't that solve the problem of fisheye lenses?  Thing is in that case... I'm not sure how a lens would work, to focus light on the chip.

    Then instead of that, an array of non-fisheye lenses, and flat chips.  With overlapping viewing angles.  Then you combine them in software, and allow the user to pick the framing from the combined image.

  • Developer
    John Arne Birkeland March 8, 2014 at 6:44am

    Joe, as always price is the biggest decider. You can make incredibly sharp lenses, but they quickly become bulky and typically cost more then your entire copter system. Same with high resolution sensors. More pixels means more processing, thermal challenges etc. adding cost at every step.

  • Joe Renteria March 7, 2014 at 3:37pm
    John, I completely understand what you are saying and agree. Would you say that this can be solved by using the higher resolution sensors which are being developed at the moment? Is there a limit to what a lense can actually capture with clarity? I would think that the technical challenge in this situation would be the sensors, more than the lenses...
  • Developer
    John Arne Birkeland March 7, 2014 at 2:54pm

    Carles, that is the nature of any fisheye lens. To be precise, the actual lens can have great optical sharpness at the edges, but the areas that the sensor has to cover gets larger and larger as you get closer to the lens edge. Meaning that the spatial image resolution is much lower at the edges compared to the center.

  • Carles Gelada March 7, 2014 at 10:16am

    John, you say that the fish eye 360 deg are only sharp on the center. What makes you think so?

    I believe that this is the future of gimbals, simpler, light, cheaper than gimbals, and requires much less prossesing power than camera arrays.

  • Joe Renteria March 7, 2014 at 8:57am
    The technical and financial limitations are temporary. Remember paying $20 for a 100mb Zip Disk? Only to have it fail months later causing you to lose all your hard work? The future of aerial video is completely gimbal free. I give it five years max. It may be an improved version of the technology in this article, or it may involve multiple cameras working together. Our mechanical gimbals will be on the shelf next to our mechanical speed controls.
This reply was deleted.