
Nixie – Wearable camera that can fly [video] - mhb
https://flynixie.com/
======
Mithaldu
> Nixie is in development.

What kind of development? Are you trying to figure out if you can do it? Are
you building the first prototype? Do you have a prototype? Are you working
towards making it mass-producable?

Don't just waffle, actually tell people where you are. Otherwise you run a
good risk of being mistaken for snake oil peddlers.

~~~
joosters
It's the usual waste-of-space website design. Let's fill the front page with
photos and bios of ourselves, while not bothering to include any useful
information about the actual product.

~~~
uptown
Or maybe the team they've assembled is working on exactly that. At this stage
- it's not really yet a product, but a concept. Instead of shitting on their
website design, why not wait a while to see if this collection of seemingly
talented people with a common goal are able to accomplish what they've set out
to do?

~~~
joosters
Sorry, 'design' was a poor choice of words by me. It is the content on the
page that annoys me. Even if they are just at a concept stage, they could have
useful information on the page.

------
phillmv
Huh. Why make this _wearable_? Isn't that kind of an insane design constraint?
I mean, what's the battery life on something small enough to wrap around your
wrist - five minutes?

I mean, you go and do whatever you want. I'm just really enjoying imagining
that meeting.

Is this something the lead was just passionate about? Are they serious about
the "friends walking around in a park who casually want aerial selfies" use
case? Are they serious about the "people who go adventure sporting but can't
plan ahead to carry an extra couple lbs of gear" use case?

Do any of them regularly think "geez, if only I could spontaneously capture
aerial footage at any given moment of any given day"?

Did they assemble a team of experts, and this one guy just stonewalled them
because his flexible wing design was a pet feature and they had no other way
to incorporate it into the product?

Did they approach an investor, and the investor said "Nah, someone's already
working on next-gen brain-dead easy adventure drones. You know what's sexy?
_Wearable_ next-gen brain-dead easy adventure drones".

~~~
cfontes
For climbers and maybe surfers(water proof ?) this might be handy...

Sometimes it's not about planning... When climbing for example it's really
hard to take decent pictures, because it's hard to go to the places where the
picture would look good.

Their focus should probably be more like sports than "friends in the park"

I also think they will face some serious issues with making this thing work
and I don't know how big the market is.

But I would really consider buying one if they made this thing work.

~~~
ahlatimer
As a climber, I don't see how the design constraint of it _wearable_ makes it
any more useful. It being reasonably small and lightweight (and robust) would
be nice for me to actually carry it with me regularly, but I don't want it on
my wrist. I want it on my harness or in my pack since having things on your
wrist can make some holds virtually unusable, especially if you're crack
climbing.

~~~
cfontes
Hi, fellow climber!

As a bracelet it will easily fit your harness rings.

------
taylorbuley
It's clever psychology to place the (3D-rendered?) product shot right next to
the mountain climber action shot. But it's trickery and leaves a foul taste in
my mouth.

Failing to include any actual pictures (or in this case, real footage) of a
product "in development" always undermines my confidence by giving me the
vaporware vibe.

I'm a much bigger fan of Oculus' "in development" communications. "Here's what
we built, here's what works and doesn't work about it, and here's where we're
going next and why."

~~~
asynchronous13
How does one include real footage when the product does not exist yet?

~~~
14113
They have a working development prototype, as seen in the video on this page:

[http://www.engadget.com/2014/09/29/nixie-wearable-
drone/](http://www.engadget.com/2014/09/29/nixie-wearable-drone/)

I presume that that's what they're shooting the video from currently...

~~~
miahi
At 0:12 in the youtube video you can see how it's done: you fake it like the
big guys[1]. That white thing on the left looks exactly like a Phantom[2]
landing gear.

The trouble with these small drones is that they are too light to be stable -
the video will be shaky unless they do a lot of post-processing.

[1] [http://www.theverge.com/2012/9/6/3297878/nokias-pureview-
sti...](http://www.theverge.com/2012/9/6/3297878/nokias-pureview-still-photos-
also-include-fakes)

[2] [http://www.dji.com/product/phantom](http://www.dji.com/product/phantom)

------
seanp2k2
Personally, the ability to wrist-wear this doesn't intrigue me at all. I have
several small flying things (Blade nano qx, mcp-x, msr-x), so I'm somewhat
familiar with what's currently possible on a production scale in terms of
battery life, weight, etc. It shouldn't be a problem for them to get
~10-minute flight times out of this, or keep it stable in wind (though larger,
heavier craft with gyro-stabilized gimbals will have a large advantage).

What I see as the biggest problem is exactly the thing that doesn't seem to
add any value for me: being able to wrist-wear it. While small-scale RC flying
things are incredibly durable these days (material scaling and all that), I
think it'd be much too heavy, much too fiddly, and much too fragile to also
make it wrist-wearable.

------
gregbarbosa
The problem I see with the product so far is that all the images appear to be
renders, and not actual product shots.

Also the demo video shows shots from what appears to be a drone; is it the
actually Nixie, or is it another drone used to exemplify what the Nixie would
be able to do?

I want this to be real.

------
jasonlfunk
Looks pretty cool. Of course, it's all in the execution. If the thing takes
bad video and doesn't consistently record the action that you want it to - it
doesn't matter how cool it is.

------
cwal37
So putting together: Quality Video + Small Size + Aerial Mobility +
Flexibility + Weatherproofing(presumably, even just sweat on a wrist or fog
could be a problem) seems incredibly ambitious (and of course, super neat).

However, I can't picture something comfortably wrapping around my wrist that
also has enough battery power to have any significant flying time and deal
with basic weather conditions, like a breeze. Just in trying to remember tiny
copters and things I've had in the past, it would be kind of amazing to me if
the power supply and utilization has advanced that much.

Any new action-cam is going to be referenced against the ubiquitous GoPro, so
I feel ok making a comparison. I have a GoPro Hero 3+, and filming at 1080 the
battery only lasts a couple hours. Turn on the wifi, and that time takes a
significant hit. As far as I can tell from the renders in the video, this
would have a smaller battery than those in a GoPro, but would need to provide
more power, since the thing is flying. Maybe I'm wrong about this, again, just
eyeballing form the renders.

It's a neat concept, and when I first got a GoPro I was surprised by how damn
small the thing was, so I imagine camera boards will only get more
intriguingly small and effective. I do wonder about the lens though, as it
appears to be tiny. Perhaps more is explained in the video which I watched on
silent. Would be nice if there was some text to parse somewhere for people
without sound.

------
Syi
I was really interested when I saw this the other day and it is an awesome
idea but as others have mentioned I wish they would give some details on how
they plan to address some of the key issues.

Most importantly and an issue which seems to have been affecting drones in
general is battery life. Even current commercially successful drones only last
a matter of minutes before needing to be recharged and they are several times
the size of the nixie and dont have cameras to deal with. What happens if you
are climbing as in the video and 3 minutes later the battery starts dying
while you are stuck on a mountain face?

I've liked the concept ever since I heard about quadcopters though and I think
it has a lot of potential. From the video I think they're suggesting that you
could have an option which sets the Nixie up so that you basically just throw
it in the air and it will track + record you. This is obviously a big software
challenge (motion tracking the target) that they will have to face although
still arguably easier than battery life or flight stability in bad weather
conditions.

If they launch it as a glorified selfie taker though I think it would be a
shame as it could do so much more. As shown it could compete with the GoPro -
hands free and a much desired camera angle - for filming sports, as well as
things like amateur TV/film recording, surveying, mapping, etc. That extra
functionality could all be added with software updates, its the hardware and
physical design which I'm hoping they have a secret answer to.

~~~
invertedohm
No matter how incredible the software is, I don't see a solution for the core
problem that they will need to solve: battery vs weight. It's revealing that
there are no prototypes shown at all.

Very curious what their weight goal is and how they plan to deal with physics.

~~~
Syi
Yeah especially as they plan for it to be wearable. It needs to be light
enough to comfortably stay on your wrist for a period of time. Taking the
climbing example again, having even a few pounds extra weight on your arm
makes things a lot more difficult. If they added battery packs which the Nixie
could recharge from to compensate then it kind of defeats the point of it
being wearable and so portable.

~~~
mgkimsal
"If they added battery packs which the Nixie could recharge from to compensate
then it kind of defeats the point of it being wearable and so portable."

Would depend on how it's done, of course, but just because something is able
to use battery packs doesn't force me to carry them with me all the time. Just
having some I could keep in a car to replace quickly while 'out' would be
sufficient for some (many?) use cases.

------
ck2
Wouldn't the battery for that thing be far bigger than your wrist?

We're not talking thifty cpus at idle here, it's four motors at high rpm.

Even LiPo has its limits and I sure wouldn't want a high capacity LiPo on my
wrist without a shield.

The protox only has 4 minutes of flight time and it doesn't have a camera or
gps. [http://www.revell.com/radio-
control/estescontrol/4606.html](http://www.revell.com/radio-
control/estescontrol/4606.html)

------
lucvh
See some huge design issues with this

Drones are not that safe unmanned yet.

Something this small will never deal with wind.

The flexible spars that form the bracelet need to be rigid to reliably
transfer force from the rotors to the frame.

Battery life will be terrible

------
ponyous
But do you need to control it with your phone? It looks awesome if you can
just release and that's it, without the need to control the camera.

~~~
wyck
I think that would defeat the purpose, I'm sure you can set waypoints, like
with current off the shelve drones, or have auto target tracking software
(already exists in some cameras).

The real difficulty as far as I know (for automated drone cameras) is tracking
elevation without an operator, for what I know the error via GPS data is
really large *like =- 5000 ft, and completely unreliable with real features
(like the cliff the rock climber is on).

~~~
icebraining
Using the wrist thingy as a beacon, and assuming you can detect the angle and
distance with decent accuracy, wouldn't it be possible to detect where you are
relative to the user? Then you could film her/him from a few meters away
without really caring where you are relative to "the world". You wouldn't even
need GPS, just the beacon sensor and a 3-axis accelerometer.

------
gbajson
Hi, Nixie looks super cool, but without a spec it's really hard to tell how
useful it is.

How long does it fly? How to control it (especially during a rock
climbing...)? What's it's range? How does it land? How to find it after
landing? Which flight controller is used? Does it have GPS?

I am super curious of the answers.

------
Malic
I think the headaches of the FAA in their efforts to define the approved use
of drones, has yet to begin.

~~~
laumars
I could be mistaken, but I thought the various aviation organisations only
needed to be involved if the drones reach a certain altitude.

At least I believe this is the rules for flying model planes in the UK. Other
countries might differ.

~~~
asynchronous13
In the US, the FAA makes a distinction between recreational and commercial
usage. For example, it is perfectly legal to take pictures of your home from a
radio-controlled vehicle. But, if you sell those pictures, now you've broken
the law -- even if you are selling the pictures well after the flight. (Don't
try to apply logic, it doesn't make sense)

The FAA controls all airspace in the US. It's not true that they don't control
airspace below 400ft. However, FAA has published guidance for operation of
radio-controlled vehicles that includes altitude restrictions.

~~~
laumars
> The FAA controls all airspace in the US. It's not true that they don't
> control airspace below 400ft. However, FAA has published guidance for
> operation of radio-controlled vehicles that includes altitude restrictions.

I didn't say the FAA don't control airspace below _n_ feet. I appreciate my
wording was rather vague, but by "involved" I meant that model plane pilots
don't require prior permission to fly in the aforementioned airspace
(presumably bar some caveats such as whether you're sat next to an airport).

Above a certain altitude and you need that area submitted and signed off as a
flying club / whatever. Below that altitude and you can basically just fly
your models on an adhoc basis.

Again, I accept I could be completely wrong on this so appreciate your input
:)

------
EvanAnderson
The drone cameras from The Artificial Kid are arriving, eh?
[http://books.google.com/books/about/The_Artificial_Kid.html?...](http://books.google.com/books/about/The_Artificial_Kid.html?id=E6osAQAAIAAJ)

------
robomartin
I wasn't going to post this comment...but...so be it.

I continue to be disappointed every time I see projects or companies with
teams full of PhD's. I am sure there are some that are fantastic, but that has
not been my experience.

We have a number of PhD's in our family and circle of friends. Some have
trouble putting together Ikea furniture or can't fix a toilet. Maybe they just
don't want to. And maybe that's the root of the problem.

I don't know what it is in PhD education that might cause this. I stopped
after my BSEE due to life circumstances (parents sick, had to go to work and
provide for the entire family). Yet, having come from an entrepreneurial
family my life has been about just that. Because of this I like to think I
became a Computer Scientist (more on this later), Mechanical Engineer, Optics
Engineer, Manufacturing Engineer, Machinist (CNC and manual), Expert Welder,
Expert Woodworker and a whole pile of other skill sets I can't even recall
now.

In other words, having acquired a solid technical and scientific foundation
through my EE education I launched into entrepreneurship. This forced me to
learn other disciplines because back then I didn't have the money to hire
people. So it was years and years of 18 hour days doing and learning at the
same time. Devouring books with a purpose and applying the knowledge right
away in real world practical scenarios. When I wrote an occasional paper,
article or ran training sessions at conferences they were always characterized
by real-world applicable and actionable information rather than the walls and
walls of unintelligible formulas that characterize PhD publications.

On the Computer Science part. I don't think a Computer Science degree existed
when I was in school (early 80's). If it did it may have existed in places I
could simply not afford to attend. These were the days of such things as the
Elf single board computers (google it). If you wanted to work with computers
you had to become an EE and build them yourself, sometimes out of raw chips
(as I did many times with 6502's, 8080's, 8085's, 8086's, 68K, etc.). If you
have experience wire wrapping you are my people.

I know solid experienced PhD's exist. I do know a few of them. Most of them
are in aerospace. And most of them got there by being tinkerers since before
going to college. I other words, they were natural-born makers before they
entered academia. This meant building things in the real world, failing,
learning, trying again, etc. Some of these guys have worked on some really
amazing projects anyone would recognize when mentioned, for example, stealth
technology.

The one characteristic that distinguishes these PhD-led projects from the ones
that make me say "Yup. Another bunch of clueless PhD's" is that they are
practical, very real and have goals and milestones that are met or exceeded.
No pie in the sky stuff. At least none I've been aware of.

I am not criticizing this project in particular as much as making a general
statement and asking the question: What is it about PhD education that creates
this kind of an effect? Are they too used to functioning in a world of grants
for research that seldom touches reality (or leads to anything in the real
world)?

To speak to this project. This looks like a bunch of guys who are really good
at writing grant proposals who got together and got some money from Intel to
play. I remember attending an SBIR converence many years ago. I walked away
calling it the "PhD club of America". It's PhD's giving PhD's money to play.
And in a lot of cases --not all-- nothing practically useful come out of the
process. Yet it feeds the PhD machinery.

Interesting.

------
kaitnieks
Another similar product is AirDog:
[https://www.airdog.com/](https://www.airdog.com/) ...except the curious
feature of being wearable.

------
johnpowell
At the end of the promo video the suggestions to watch next are unfortunate.

[http://i.imgur.com/21olI3n.jpg](http://i.imgur.com/21olI3n.jpg) (NSFW)

------
DevKoala
This seems like a pretty cool product. I'd be interested in one if they
deliver on the promise.

------
aman1121
Looks super cool. Let's see how well it works, can't wait to try it out
myself.

------
deutronium
I'm curious if there is any object avoidance technology on-board?

------
bitJericho
The person in the picture isn't wearing one.

------
spilk
Nice shot of Red Rock Canyon.

------
mariusz79
It makes me sad when I see a device like this advertised as just another way
to take selfies. It could be so much more.

