Industrial MIPI camera for Raspberry Pi  - Small Questionnaire - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / projects

author: Get Cameras
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: October 16, 2018, 11:59:17 am
content: Hello everyone,We have started with the development of our own embedded MIPI camera module for the Raspberry Pi with an industrial image sensor. Currently we are in the specification phase and we are interested in your preferences so we will develop a product that does fit your requirements. If you have a little bit of time, please consider filling in this small questionnaire.https://www.get-cameras.com/poll

author: wasyoungonce
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 16, 2018, 11:38:40 pm
content: Ever think of Astronomy use? These guys have been playing with 2nd hand sensors from DSLRs for astro. Been building a cam86 but had to stop from surgeries.http://astroccd.org/2016/10/cam86/Most prefer mono sensors. High sensitivity sensors/cameras with the right pixel size (not too small) are in demand in the astro imagery crowd, finder scope cameras, polar alignment cameras, all sky cameras, deepsky cameras, even cameras to monitor the mount remotely. Most use ASCOM software to run them.https://ascom-standards.org/The Raspberry Pi is an ideal platform for this due to connectivity and ability to run other systems. Or even Indi.https://indilib.org/A growing market but a big learning curve.

author: Siwastaja
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 17, 2018, 05:13:37 am
content: Quote from: Get Cameras on October 16, 2018, 11:59:17 amWe were looking at doing the same; needed some specific in-house cameras, and were already using Raspberry Pi anyway.It turns out, Raspberry Pi implements so-called strong DRM in order to prevent unwanted competition. You can find their stance on the matter; they have implied their purpose isn't only to prevent cloning / making similar cameras, but also prevent any kind of innovation going on with specific camera modules that even wouldn't compete with their own modules directly.Now, while you can work around any DRM, at least here, this is illegal (circumventing a "strong DRM"). I guess we can't be the only place on the planet with this kind of legislation, but YMMV. Here, it's illegal, so we didn't do it.This, of course, does not prevent the Chinese clones the slightest, but has practically stopped custom camera modules being developed for the Raspberry. Some still exist. We decided to not waste our time for it, and try to minimize vendor lock-in to such a hostile company such as Raspberry Pi Foundation, keeping our options open.It's worth noting that the Raspberries come and go. It's well possible the next model doens't have the camera interface or it's different (or it has even stronger DRM). I think USB3 could be the safest bet for a generic camera interface. For your custom application-specific thing, MIPI is simpler and cheaper, but it means both endpoints must be in your own hands, and Raspberry isn't.Good luck, and lawyer up!

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 17, 2018, 06:36:18 am
content: Quote from: Siwastaja on October 17, 2018, 05:13:37 amQuick search shows they are using a security chip - have you asked them if they will sell you chips for specialised cameras?

author: Siwastaja
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 17, 2018, 06:41:45 am
content: Quote from: mikeselectricstuff on October 17, 2018, 06:36:18 amThey have an actual DRM chip (one which authenticates using encryption). The lowest-level drivers (on the SoC, to control the MIPI communication and data processing) do the authentication with said chip, and if it fails, the driver (closed binary) refuses to work.You can of course reverse-engineer, then re-implement the driver, but it doesn't run on the general-purpose CPU side, but on the GPU side, and the reference manuals for the SoC are unavailable for the general public, so while people have tried, AFAIK building the driver for the camera is almost impossible as it requires quite some heavy reverse engineering.And, from the legislation viewpoint, there is high rish these attempts would be seen as "circumventing DRM" (I know it sounds absolutely stupid), so lawyering up is a good idea if you do this on a company level. Raspberry Pi Foundation is quite a big opponent. Not worth the risk IMO.

author: Siwastaja
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 17, 2018, 06:44:49 am
content: Quote from: mikeselectricstuff on October 17, 2018, 06:36:18 amI haven't - but if you google a bit more, it turns out, others have, and the Foundation has already replied in public they have no such intention. They are not going to sell the chips or the license. Of course, thiscouldchange, but I wouldn't count on it. I took my business elsewhere. Raspberry isn't the only SBC on market.It's all about having the control, I guess. They are OK with a hobbyist soldering an LED on the pin header, but other than that, they like to have you playing on their playground, not to create a heterogenic ecosystem.

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 17, 2018, 07:25:55 am
content: Of course if you are making a higher value low volume camera, one answer would simply be to harvest chips from genuine cameras.

author: amyk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 17, 2018, 11:50:44 am
content: Quote from: Siwastaja on October 17, 2018, 06:41:45 amI thought the GPU side was open-sourced a while ago? Either way it shouldn't be difficult to crack (a 1-byte or 1-bit change... just a matter of finding which one. The codec one was already cracked long ago.)I doubt there's any real legal problem, interoperability has always been allowed for reverse-engineering in many countries including EU, and there is no copyright issue here --- it's just like chipped ink cartridges.Still, those who care about open-source and interoperability would stay away from anything RPi-related. Fuck them and Broadcom. Those bastards lure you in with their "maker" crap and just lock you in as hard as Apple.

author: Siwastaja
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 17, 2018, 12:41:22 pm
content: I took a deep look at it just some 4 months ago. Unless something radical has happened after that, the camera part of the GPU was not opened. With Raspberry, it's very difficult to know what's actually available and what's not, since they have, since the beginning, marketed using the "bait-and-switch" tactic and playing with the impressions instead of being open about what you actually get. I wasn't able to find any simple 1-byte/1-bit crack either, but wasn't looking for that exactly because we can't base our product design on criminal activity (no matter how much we think the law sucks.) So I was looking for legal options, and didn't find anything.IthinkIIRC there was some option to get out totally raw bitstream with raw bayer data in an inefficient manner, but I didn't look at it too far. Too much hassle, too much risk.I would take the legal side seriously at the company level if you are producing more than just a few one-offs, if it has the risk of catching the attention.I wouldn't be surprised the slightest if they decided to make it a legal case with a Western player.Reverse-engineering for interoperability is/was allowed as per international copyright agreements, that's exactly why DRM technologies were developed, and because DRM can always be circumvented, catch-all laws making that criminal were needed and lobbied. So at least here, changing that one bit or byte is clearly and explicitly illegal;even for personal use. For business, it's a recipe for disaster.I'm not a lawyer, and I would crack the Raspberry camera DRM happily if I really needed to, for personal projects, for one-offs, and maybe for small, low-volume products with low visibility and selected customers, but I wouldn't give an advice to do that on a public forum!Maybe I have missed something, but that was the case anyway why we didn't produce our own Raspberry Pi connected sensor module like we originally planned to do.

author: Get Cameras
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: October 18, 2018, 08:28:44 am
content: Hello everyone,I read through all of your comments, and would like to thank you for them. We had taken the DRM very lightly at first instance, but your insights have really changed our view on the matter.On the other hand, we do not plan to produce for the Raspberry Pi solely, and also consider UP boards.All your comments are very helpful.Thanks alot.

author: amyk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 18, 2018, 12:19:29 pm
content: Quote from: Siwastaja on October 17, 2018, 12:41:22 pmAt least in the US, companies who have tried to lock out competitors with DRM-ish schemes and then subsequently tried to sue have a precedent of losing:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sega_v._Accoladehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lexmark_International,_Inc._v._Static_Control_Components,_Inc.There's no copyright issue here (unlike with a lot of other cases involving DRM.)