
Axiom Beta – Digital cinema camera built around FOSS and open hardware - jarmitage
https://www.apertus.org/axiom-beta
======
rhn_mk1
I wish them all the best - it's high time people had actual control of their
cameras. I mean both control over the hardware and repairability. While CHDK
[0] may offer the first, they do nothing about the second.

As much as this is important, I am convinced Open things are most useful at
the lower end, opening doors to people who would otherwise just not be able to
participate. I would have a hard time justifying getting one of those for
myself, because of the price, as a non-pro.

Still, I hope they succeed.

~~~
gt_
6-7 years ago, I would have been saving up for this. That was a very different
market for video production professionals.

I never liked hacking cameras that were not made to be hacked, but this one
is. It’s not the first, but the other projects appeared to be barely getting
by.

The sad part is just how long this has taken to come to fruition, and how
little sense it makes economically at this point.

~~~
deftturtle
> how little sense it makes economically at this point.

Please elaborate.

~~~
gt_
Sure.

For one, many of the problems this solves in a holistic and _better_ way have
found standard solutions widely implemented in the indie production market.

RED cameras are fairly prolific and accessible to a lot of people these days,
and other imperfect solutions are popularly adopted as well.

While this option is all-around more capable, the modding workflow is still
foreign and will take some time to adapt.

Purely economically, there is a lot less money flowing into indie production
outfits, particularly from advertising and indie entertainment enterprises
like Youtube-online media channels. Advertising is embracing data based
decision models that override costly creative production efforts that would
properly utilize a camera like this.

In short, this thing is for artists, and artists are screwed.

------
SpliffnCola
If you are wondering who the target audience this cine camera is for then you
are not the target audience.

To those asking why it doesn't have AF: no cine camera has AF.

In regards to lens selection; the camera seems to be modular so there
shouldn't be much stopping Axiom or yourself from getting a different lens
mounting plate.

~~~
bprater
While it's accurate that cine cameras use a human focus puller, its an
oversight in this cameras engineering not to include a way to drive the len's
focus or the aperture. (Blackmagic's early cinema cameras used these 'dumb'
mounts, too, but it frustrated users because they couldn't electrically run
the len's controls.)

Having an API for the lens and aperture would have opened it up for developers
to use these creatively, such as focusing on one point in the frame and then
zipping focus to another point using easing functions.

~~~
SpliffnCola
Agreed on all points. Due to the modular design, and I'm assuming here, it
seems wireless (and on camera) focus pulling could be added onto the cam.

Something like [http://www.rtmotion.com/lens-control-
system](http://www.rtmotion.com/lens-control-system) or
[https://cinegears.com/product/cinegears-single-axis-
wireless...](https://cinegears.com/product/cinegears-single-axis-wireless-
follow-focus-express-kit/)

Not sure about aperture adjustment from the cam body itself; usually, not
always though, cine lenses are constant aperture primes or zooms.

~~~
frostburg
Cine lenses almost universally have variable aperture. When a zoom is
"constant aperture" what is means is that the maximum aperture is the same
across the entire focal range, not that you cannot close it down when needed.

~~~
SpliffnCola
Thanks for the correction. That aspect slipped my mind.

------
flyinglizard
It's a great effort but such development is too slow and resource limited to
really challenge commercial solutions. They don't get to make their own ASICs
(e.g. Canon DIGIC) so they need to use limited and expensive FPGAs; they can't
make their own sensors (e.g. RED Dragon) so they need to use CMV12000 which is
a sensor for scientific and industrial applications - fast, but not optimized
for image quality (from my limited knowledge! I could be wrong). Most likely
they won't get access to latest and greatest OEM sensors like Sony BSIs.

By the time it's out, you could buy either a fully integrated solution that's
far ahead technically - from the likes of RED, Canon, Blackmagic etc - or if
you're after some exotic application you could just use an industrial camera
from IDS or Ximea.

Yes the customization and the abilities around this camera could be endless,
but it'd take something really special on that end to overcome to hardware
limitations coming from the development model and to make it a viable
professional tool.

~~~
mmastrac
I'm not sure your concerns are completely valid here. We've reached the point
where consumer phone cameras are good enough for 90% of photography. At this
point there's huge value in giving better access to the platform itself to
start applying machine learning techniques directly on the camera.

In addition, the FPGA you call limited I'd argue gives access to powerful
reprogrammable logic. Why hard-code image processing algorithms when you can
update them as new techniques come out?

Not only is this an amazing sensor (180fps, global shutter) but it's using
cutting edge technology. I'd argue that it's possible sensor technology is
reaching some of its limits and an industrial sensor here can match the
quality of DSLR sensors. It may only be 12MP but Google and Apple have both
shown that intelligent algorithms can produce amazing results from sensors
that size.

The video on the properties of the sensor itself is quite impressive:
[http://vimeo.com/17230822](http://vimeo.com/17230822)

~~~
phkahler
>> At this point there's huge value in giving better access to the platform
itself to start applying machine learning techniques directly on the camera.

What does machine learning have to do with photography? If there's an
explanation for that, then I'd add why does it need to happen on the camera?

~~~
bri3d
I worry this is going to go the "computer aided photography isn't the one true
photography" direction, but check this out:

[https://research.googleblog.com/2017/10/portrait-mode-on-
pix...](https://research.googleblog.com/2017/10/portrait-mode-on-pixel-2-and-
pixel-2-xl.html?m=1)

ML has thousands of applications in photography, from HDR to mask creation to
feature removal to subtle aids like noise reduction.

------
zrth
Wow, congratulations to everyone involved! How absolutely fantastic that there
is another completely open device we can hack and enjoy! Looking forward to
seeing what ingenious modifications and applications people will be coming up
with!

------
mtgx
A while ago a bunch of makers of documentaries and journalists asked camera
manufacturers to support encryption, but most of the companies, if not all,
ignored them. Does this project support encryption?

[https://freedom.press/news/over-150-filmmakers-and-
photojour...](https://freedom.press/news/over-150-filmmakers-and-
photojournalists-call-major-camera-manufacturers-build-encryption-their-
cameras/)

~~~
UncleEntity
Its reprogrammable so it most likely could be patched to support encryption
between the sensor and storage module in the FPGA firmware.

Though, I have to say, that sounds like an anti-feature -- instead of just
taking a few shots they'll just take all your photos and throw you in jail for
espionage because "if you have nothing to fear you have nothing to hide."

~~~
erric
Unless it's stored in an obfuscated vault. Not saying this is immune from
detection etc, but it may offer journalists some form of plausible
deniability.

------
luckydude
So I do photography as a hobby as well as some semi professional stuff (I
shoot for the pros at hockey tournaments, I'm not as good as they are but
close, they get keepers every 13 seconds I'm more like 20-25 seconds; seems
like a long time but that includes the time to look at each shot and delete
the crap. They are faster because they know when they take the shot if they
missed and they delete without looking at it. I'm not that good, I have to
look.)

I shoot hockey with a Canon 1DX II, before I got that body I used a 5DIII. If
I'm shooting for me, I use a Canon 200mm f2; if I'm shooting for the pros,
they want more like a 300mm so I add a 1.4x teleconverter.

For the people who don't know what any of that means, this might help: the 1DX
II is Canon's best sports body, it retails for about $6000. The 200mm + the
1.4x is another $6000.

So truth in advertising, I've got a lot invested in my current kit (not just
that stuff, I have a number of other Canon lenses, some Sigma, Rokinon). So
perhaps I'm not objective.

All that said, I don't get this camera at all. No auto focus, no viewfinder,
those are complete deal breakers for me (electronic viewfinder doesn't count
unless it is 100% as fast as a normal view finder. I'm timing shots so I get
the puck going into the net, that means a lag as small as a few milliseconds
screws me up. And when I say "me" I really mean any sports photographer, or
action photographer where the work flow doesn't allow you to use burst to
hopefully get the right shot by accident).

It looks like lots of cool technology but I'm definitely not interested in
owning one.

So who is interested in owning one and what would you do with it? Where does
this camera shine?

~~~
bprater
I'm a software engineer and hobbyist cinematographer. This camera is meant for
people like me.

The reason for a camera like this is to open the tool set up for active
development, in a way that traditional camera-makers haven't opened their
hardware up for access.

Here's an example: high-ISO shooting. What makes it possible for cameras like
Sony's a7s series to shoot in nearly dark conditions? Is it the sensor or have
the engineers leveraged the fast CPUs to do real-time noise reduction?

By giving engineers access to the hardware, we could start exploring high-ISO
programming. Similarly, we might learn how to auto-calibrate lenses in new
ways that could take the cheap 'nifty-fifty' lens, apply machine learning and
have it perform like a $3k Zeiss lens.

Even a topic like color science, the holy grail of company's knowledge base
like Canon or Alexa, could be explored by a wider audience of scientists and
engineers. Until we can get our hands on the hardware thru code, most of this
is nearly impossible, except projects like Magic Lantern.

~~~
luckydude
OK, that makes a ton more sense. And I couldn't agree more that the camera
companies are shooting themselves in the foot by not opening up their
firmware. I'm a software guy too and there are changes I'd love to make to
Canon's menu system (I really want to be able to map a button to any part of
the menu system, in particular a button that got me to the in camera crop
feature that the 5DIV and 1DX have).

I suppose they think they have secret sauce buried in there but by keeping it
secret they aren't getting any patches from us hackers.

------
rwmj
These are the company building a RISC-V processor from an FPGA I think.

Edit: a downvote? It's true, see this presentation:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PyJ8PoASWdw](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PyJ8PoASWdw)

------
rasjani
Swapping sensors - wouldn’t that also require hefty software changes?

------
agjacobson
Price point is everything. Good luck.

------
mrstone
Why does a camera need ethernet?

~~~
nine_k
Download what you shoot instantly. Also, complete remote control when you need
it.

~~~
phkahler
Isn't auto-focus a little more important?

~~~
sethhochberg
AF isn't typically used for cinema. The camera operator or an assistant will
manage focus:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focus_puller](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focus_puller)

~~~
Andrey_Filippov
A focus puller is already built using FPGA+GNU/Linux -
[https://github.com/Qinematiq](https://github.com/Qinematiq)

------
sandworm101
Magic lantern? An interesting choice of name for anyone familiar with the
history of spyware, encryption, and government surveillance .

~~~
Sir_Substance
Magic lantern has been around for years, possibly decades. It might as well be
a brand name at this point. I have almost no interest in photography and I
recognize it and associate it with cameras instantly just from osmosing
knowledge about it from the camera nerds around me.

------
brndnmtthws
This is interesting, however, in my experience it's the lens that makes the
camera. It would be pretty cool to have a body that is 100% open source, but
the best lenses (which IMO are Leica and Fujinon lenses) tend to have
proprietary mounts and autofocus systems.

If they could also produce a high quality set of prime lenses, that'd be nice.
I think the real magic (and difficulty) lies in producing great lenses, which
is an entirely analogue process.

