Khen Cohen, Gal Hodeda, Emmanuel Almog, Dan Raviv, and David Mendlovic, "Hardware analysis for motion estimation task," Appl. Opt. 61, 4303-4314 (2022)
This work introduces hardware metrics to evaluate imaging sensor (camera) ability to cope with temporal change (motion). Shifting from images towards moving elements demands better tools for evaluation than just refresh rate, and this work is here to close that gap. We focus on the sampling frequency, signal to noise ratio, rolling shutter, and modulation transfer function as a set of parameters to define four fundamental conditions to evaluate and compare the quality of motion sensing. We further examine our theory on existing hardware used in modern equipment and report our findings.
Data underlying the results presented in this paper are not publicly available at this time but may be obtained from the authors upon reasonable request.
Cited By
You do not have subscription access to this journal. Cited by links are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an Optica member, or as an authorized user of your institution.
You do not have subscription access to this journal. Figure files are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an Optica member, or as an authorized user of your institution.
You do not have subscription access to this journal. Article tables are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an Optica member, or as an authorized user of your institution.
You do not have subscription access to this journal. Equations are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an Optica member, or as an authorized user of your institution.
Please note that these are typical (assuming typical environmental conditions) cases and are based on our findings. The DVS Gen3 is suitable for high-frequency, close scenes with low contrast and low light, while the IMX 650 works well for long distance and very high-speed scenes. For low-speed scenes, we recommend the IMX 350.
Table 5.
Detecting Frames per Second for Each Device Using the Nyquist Theorema
Sensor
Device/Mode
Min Freq. [Hz]
Max Freq. [Hz]
IMX315
iPhone 120 FPS
59.449
59.646
IMX315
iPhone 240 FPS
123.94
124.72
IMX700
Huawei 240 FPS
120.79
121.57
IMX650
Huawei 1920 FPS
1003.3
1012
SAK2L3
Samsung Galaxy Note9 960 FPS
234.34,480
239.72,485.51
Samsung Gen3
DVS
505.04
510.2
Min and Max frequencies are defined as the first time error 90 deg crossed and the second time, respectively. Please note that the DVS Gen3 has ${1_{\rm{ms}}}$ temporal resolution, or effectively 1000 FPS.
Table 6.
Calculation of Scene Types in Pixel Units (Assuming Typical Advanced Imaging System with Focal Length of about and Pixel Size of about )
Please note that these are typical (assuming typical environmental conditions) cases and are based on our findings. The DVS Gen3 is suitable for high-frequency, close scenes with low contrast and low light, while the IMX 650 works well for long distance and very high-speed scenes. For low-speed scenes, we recommend the IMX 350.
Table 5.
Detecting Frames per Second for Each Device Using the Nyquist Theorema
Sensor
Device/Mode
Min Freq. [Hz]
Max Freq. [Hz]
IMX315
iPhone 120 FPS
59.449
59.646
IMX315
iPhone 240 FPS
123.94
124.72
IMX700
Huawei 240 FPS
120.79
121.57
IMX650
Huawei 1920 FPS
1003.3
1012
SAK2L3
Samsung Galaxy Note9 960 FPS
234.34,480
239.72,485.51
Samsung Gen3
DVS
505.04
510.2
Min and Max frequencies are defined as the first time error 90 deg crossed and the second time, respectively. Please note that the DVS Gen3 has ${1_{\rm{ms}}}$ temporal resolution, or effectively 1000 FPS.
Table 6.
Calculation of Scene Types in Pixel Units (Assuming Typical Advanced Imaging System with Focal Length of about and Pixel Size of about )
Add to BibSonomy