6 ms·

I'd say no to that, aside from the reliability and KISS aspects of this, there is one thing cameras won't be able to do properly: parallax. In tight parking spa

I'd say no to that, aside from the reliability and KISS aspects of this, there is one thing cameras won't be able to do properly: parallax. In tight parking spaces or near curbs I will often move around in the car so that I can see obstacles without having to adjust the mirrors.

pbhjpbhj 7y ago
They could parallax though, so that doesn't seem like the best argument. They could also use complex optics like "plain lens" with a "fish-eye border", or highlight obstacles by boosting colour contrast or adding in non-visual sensor data. If cameras are that much better we should be getting vehicles that use both (which we do for rear-view but not side-mirrors AFAIK).
- catalogia 7y ago
  > They could parallax though, so that doesn't seem like the best argument. I've never seen parallax emulated with head tracking that didn't have piss-poor latency issues. Not to mention poorly configured kalman filters that seem to always do too little or too much smoothing. These systems are fine for cute tech demos but don't belong in safety-critical applications involving multiple tons of steel moving at 100+km/h. Before replacing mirrors in cars, why not start with making a TV "window" that actually works. Prove the technology in a real world application that isn't safety critical, then we can talk. If it's ready for use on highways, then it should be easy to mount a TV on a wall and provide a convincing experience of actually looking out a window.
  - dandelany 7y ago
    This. A “transparent” A-pillar (the bit separating your windshield from driver’s side window) would be a good start, and if it worked well, it’s a feature I’d pay extra for.
    - scrumper 7y ago
      Absolutely. Big thick A pillars have increased survivability in crashes (embedded airbags, stronger structure) but that doesn't come for free - they cause some accidents (hiding bikers, also cars when pulling out of junctions). I'd love to see a transparent A pillar but I can imagine the parallax issues (talked about in other comments here) would make them a bit weird.
      - pro_zac 7y ago
        Volvo made a concept car with glass A pillars and no B pillars. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volvo_SCC https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volvo_SCC
        scrumper 7y ago
        That was interesting, thanks. Good to see how much of its safety features are now common (blind spot assist, adaptive cruise control etc.) And, given this thread, amusing that the wikipedia article doesn't pick up on the A pillars.
  - __MatrixMan__ 7y ago
    I've never seen head tracking applications at all, and I'm not surprised that they're underwhelming, but I hope the state of practice gets better because it would be really cool to have an AR setup where metadata is projected onto the windshield and windows such that it lines up with the driver's perspective. Imagine a thousand foot tall semi-transparent google maps pin, resting lightly on the head of the person you're picking up, visible for hundreds of miles but only to those who are interested.
    - catalogia 7y ago
      The sci-fi tech I've wanted for years is a liquid crystal windshield that blacks out a small circle over the sun from the driver's perspective while leaving the rest of the windshield clear. Driving west in the evening or east in the morning, I wager a lot of people have had this idea at some point. I have no idea if it will ever become feasible, but I sure hope it does.
      - FPGAhacker 7y ago
        I've had the exact same thought. I expect it to happen eventually, or some other tech will render the issue moot.
      - astatine 7y ago
        This. Not just the sun, but more annoyingly, opposing headlights in the night. Technologies to avoid blinding opposing drivers are not adequate. We could do with technology to assist those who are on the affected side.
        xaedes 7y ago
        Material sciences could bring a solution: Transparent material that becomes opaque to bright light (something like gamma < 1, gain < 1) in the direction of the light. So each point of the material is transparent or opaque depending on the viewing angle and respective directed light flow through it. I think such a material could be engineered.
- froindt 7y ago
  >If cameras are that much better we should be getting vehicles that use both (which we do for rear-view but not side-mirrors AFAIK). The 2015 Honda CR-V has a camera under the right mirror. When you turn your right blinker on, the screen switches to that view with an overlay for car lengths. It's kinda handy, but I probably wouldn't pay much more marginally for that feature.
  - FPGAhacker 7y ago
    It's about being more likely to choose the CR-V because of the features, rather than paying more, I think.
- elFarto 7y ago
  There's a new Honda 'e', that doesn't have side mirrors at all, and just has two screens inside. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pEKq8jmckz0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pEKq8jmckz0
  - seltzered_ 7y ago
    Honda has a video specifically on the camera mirror system, and mentions using a wider fov: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Urf9JK5Szn8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Urf9JK5Szn8
    - farisjarrah 7y ago
      Honda is awesome! The only other car manufacturer I would buy from beside them is probably Toyota. That being said... Please don't let them touch ANY of the software... The head unit in my car is a UI/UX disaster, if you try to use it in any capacity while driving its definitely worse then just texting and driving. The only saving grace of the Honda head unit is that they finally started implementing Android Auto in them. Also, the Lane Keep Assist and Anti-Collision features leave a lot to be desired.
      - marcc 7y ago
        Yikes. Terribly distracting controls and sounds like significant challenges with safety features (lane keep and anti-collision). What makes Honda "awesome", in your opinion? I'm wondering what is ranking higher than these safety concerns you mention?
        farisjarrah 7y ago
        I've owned a Plymouth Voyager, Toyota Tercel, Mercedes c280, Mercedes ml320, a Ford Focus, and a Jeep Wrangler in the past. Hands down the Honda is the most reliable and cheap to maintain car of any I have owned(other then perhaps the Toyota Tercel). My Honda Fit was $18,000 new and had features that were only standard on $25,000+ cars. Things like android auto, CVT transmission with flappy paddle shifters, moon roof, lane keep assist and anti-collision. Sure those systems have some problems, but I like still having them. I fully expect this car to last me 250,000+ miles.
pfortuny 7y ago
I say it is time for a forward sideways-looking camera for exiting corners or sharp crossings. I do not know if this exists but I have missed it a number of times.
- arethuza 7y ago
  That reminds me of a small project where the British Army gave a budget to some soldiers to add "accessories" to a main battle tank - one of the things they did was add sideways looking cameras at the end of the main gun so they could use it to see round corners.
- xuki 7y ago
  Audi A8 has it: https://youtu.be/TchqhDUbP8w?t=342 https://youtu.be/TchqhDUbP8w?t=342 It's gonna be a long time before mainstream car adopt this though.
  - pfortuny 7y ago
    Oh dear. That must be my next car. Unfortunately, it just cannot be... Glad it is at least being researched. Thanks for the (very precise) link!
  - wumms 7y ago
    For my eye, Bose's suspension seemed smoother: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3KPYIaks1UY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3KPYIaks1UY And it had Turbo-Boost (same video with cue-in): https://youtu.be/3KPYIaks1UY?t=81 https://youtu.be/3KPYIaks1UY?t=81
  - kube-system 7y ago
    > a long time The Ford Edge has had the option since 2015. Looks like the Explorer got it the next year. The Subaru Ascent has it for 2019. I'm sure there are others that didn't come up in the first couple pages of my search results.
- tim_hutton 7y ago
  Or camera feeds on the road that the car can access, to allow the driver to see around corners ahead of them.
darkcha0s 7y ago
The point being that a camera could just film the entire surroundings and show you that picture, instead of exactly what you are able to see through the mirror reflection- i.e. you're constantly seeing your entire blind spot, not just the part the mirror is showing you for your head location.
fortran77 7y ago
A mirror reflects a 3D image. An LCD screen isn't 3D.
OrwellianChild 7y ago
I think that parallax aside, the benefit of cameras is that a much wider angle can be represented. Much like current reverse-cameras in vehicles, the camera can capture wide/ultra-wide angles of 120-170 degrees. This lets you see everything without craning for parallax. Guidelines can be overlaid for curb/parking situations on demand. Additionally, many auto companies are already augmenting their backup cameras with 360-degree stitched top-down views, which are excellent for curb-centering, etc.
- bakies 7y ago
  You can also curve mirrors for a wider angle, see it on trucks all the time.
  - kube-system 7y ago
    Or on the passenger side mirror of any average passenger car made over the past half century or so: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objects_in_mirror_are_closer_than_they_appear https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objects_in_mirror_are_closer_t...
  - OrwellianChild 7y ago
    The point is, switching to cameras has aerodynamic efficiencies. Mirrors are currently a necessary cost that cameras could replace to improve drag coefficients, improve fuel economy/range, etc. OP's concern was that the cameras would not provide sufficient substitution for the mirror's features. I'm arguing that wide field of view solves that problem.
    - beached_whale 7y ago
      So could another camera in the car that watches the drivers head and adjusts the view based on movements. It could also be better too as you can now be comfortable and not contorted to get a proper view(even better than adjusting the mirror). It could also be disabled to provide a stead view. With a touch screen we could stay focused on a target too. Camera's provide more options
    - 7y ago
TylerE 7y ago
Most new cars have parking sensors of some kind. Synthetic 360 vision camera systems are starting to become common on luxury cars and even available on some more down-market models...and those provide way more visibility than any mirror ever will.
com2kid 7y ago
A fancy enough camera system can give you a wide FOV and accurate distance indicators to everything on screen. Parallax is one way we estimate distances, technology can do a lot better than "move head side to side to get a rough idea." Now getting people used to wide FOV, that may be challenging. Find an FPS that lets you set the FOV to anything you want, set it to 180. After a couple of minutes you can get used to it. Beyond 180 it is hard! But even 190 or so is doable after a bit of practice. Not sure how the general public would do with that though! (At what point has a high enough % of the general public played FPSs that such a UI could be gotten away with?)
kazinator 7y ago
I would say, what is also lacking are resolution, dynamic range, and latency. Regarding the latter, even if it's a closed circuit analog system with no digital buffering, there is still frame refresh to consider. At night, if the display isn't dark enough, it will act as a light source, interfering with the driver's night vision. Black has to be black, and dark objects that would be visible with the naked eye via mirror had better be visible with the camera.
- tobtoh 7y ago
  I'd assume this isn't really a problem these days? Aren't OLED screen capable of high resolution, dynamic range (include true black) and low latency? The main issue would probably be cost, but at a technical level having a suitable screen for car mirrors shouldn't be a problem.
  - Piskvorrr 7y ago
    Yeah, throwing money at it could realistically bring this from just-around-the-corner FM to Actual Machines. Not quite there for COTS equipment yet, for cost-saving reasons (fast processing needs beefy HW, which is expensive in itself, needs higher and smoother power, cooling, etc.).
randyrand 7y ago
which also gives you a much better sense of depth too as you move your head.
neuralRiot 7y ago
Not only parallax, mirrors reflections are also 3D.

pbhjpbhj 7y ago

They could parallax though, so that doesn't seem like the best argument. They could also use complex optics like "plain lens" with a "fish-eye border", or highlight obstacles by boosting colour contrast or adding in non-visual sensor data. If cameras are that much better we should be getting vehicles that use both (which we do for rear-view but not side-mirrors AFAIK).

catalogia 7y ago
> They could parallax though, so that doesn't seem like the best argument. I've never seen parallax emulated with head tracking that didn't have piss-poor latency issues. Not to mention poorly configured kalman filters that seem to always do too little or too much smoothing. These systems are fine for cute tech demos but don't belong in safety-critical applications involving multiple tons of steel moving at 100+km/h. Before replacing mirrors in cars, why not start with making a TV "window" that actually works. Prove the technology in a real world application that isn't safety critical, then we can talk. If it's ready for use on highways, then it should be easy to mount a TV on a wall and provide a convincing experience of actually looking out a window.
- dandelany 7y ago
  This. A “transparent” A-pillar (the bit separating your windshield from driver’s side window) would be a good start, and if it worked well, it’s a feature I’d pay extra for.
  - scrumper 7y ago
    Absolutely. Big thick A pillars have increased survivability in crashes (embedded airbags, stronger structure) but that doesn't come for free - they cause some accidents (hiding bikers, also cars when pulling out of junctions). I'd love to see a transparent A pillar but I can imagine the parallax issues (talked about in other comments here) would make them a bit weird.
    - pro_zac 7y ago
      Volvo made a concept car with glass A pillars and no B pillars. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volvo_SCC https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volvo_SCC
      - scrumper 7y ago
        That was interesting, thanks. Good to see how much of its safety features are now common (blind spot assist, adaptive cruise control etc.) And, given this thread, amusing that the wikipedia article doesn't pick up on the A pillars.
- __MatrixMan__ 7y ago
  I've never seen head tracking applications at all, and I'm not surprised that they're underwhelming, but I hope the state of practice gets better because it would be really cool to have an AR setup where metadata is projected onto the windshield and windows such that it lines up with the driver's perspective. Imagine a thousand foot tall semi-transparent google maps pin, resting lightly on the head of the person you're picking up, visible for hundreds of miles but only to those who are interested.
  - catalogia 7y ago
    The sci-fi tech I've wanted for years is a liquid crystal windshield that blacks out a small circle over the sun from the driver's perspective while leaving the rest of the windshield clear. Driving west in the evening or east in the morning, I wager a lot of people have had this idea at some point. I have no idea if it will ever become feasible, but I sure hope it does.
    - FPGAhacker 7y ago
      I've had the exact same thought. I expect it to happen eventually, or some other tech will render the issue moot.
    - astatine 7y ago
      This. Not just the sun, but more annoyingly, opposing headlights in the night. Technologies to avoid blinding opposing drivers are not adequate. We could do with technology to assist those who are on the affected side.
      - xaedes 7y ago
        Material sciences could bring a solution: Transparent material that becomes opaque to bright light (something like gamma < 1, gain < 1) in the direction of the light. So each point of the material is transparent or opaque depending on the viewing angle and respective directed light flow through it. I think such a material could be engineered.
froindt 7y ago
>If cameras are that much better we should be getting vehicles that use both (which we do for rear-view but not side-mirrors AFAIK). The 2015 Honda CR-V has a camera under the right mirror. When you turn your right blinker on, the screen switches to that view with an overlay for car lengths. It's kinda handy, but I probably wouldn't pay much more marginally for that feature.
- FPGAhacker 7y ago
  It's about being more likely to choose the CR-V because of the features, rather than paying more, I think.
elFarto 7y ago
There's a new Honda 'e', that doesn't have side mirrors at all, and just has two screens inside. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pEKq8jmckz0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pEKq8jmckz0
- seltzered_ 7y ago
  Honda has a video specifically on the camera mirror system, and mentions using a wider fov: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Urf9JK5Szn8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Urf9JK5Szn8
  - farisjarrah 7y ago
    Honda is awesome! The only other car manufacturer I would buy from beside them is probably Toyota. That being said... Please don't let them touch ANY of the software... The head unit in my car is a UI/UX disaster, if you try to use it in any capacity while driving its definitely worse then just texting and driving. The only saving grace of the Honda head unit is that they finally started implementing Android Auto in them. Also, the Lane Keep Assist and Anti-Collision features leave a lot to be desired.
    - marcc 7y ago
      Yikes. Terribly distracting controls and sounds like significant challenges with safety features (lane keep and anti-collision). What makes Honda "awesome", in your opinion? I'm wondering what is ranking higher than these safety concerns you mention?
      - farisjarrah 7y ago
        I've owned a Plymouth Voyager, Toyota Tercel, Mercedes c280, Mercedes ml320, a Ford Focus, and a Jeep Wrangler in the past. Hands down the Honda is the most reliable and cheap to maintain car of any I have owned(other then perhaps the Toyota Tercel). My Honda Fit was $18,000 new and had features that were only standard on $25,000+ cars. Things like android auto, CVT transmission with flappy paddle shifters, moon roof, lane keep assist and anti-collision. Sure those systems have some problems, but I like still having them. I fully expect this car to last me 250,000+ miles.

pfortuny 7y ago

I say it is time for a forward sideways-looking camera for exiting corners or sharp crossings. I do not know if this exists but I have missed it a number of times.

arethuza 7y ago
That reminds me of a small project where the British Army gave a budget to some soldiers to add "accessories" to a main battle tank - one of the things they did was add sideways looking cameras at the end of the main gun so they could use it to see round corners.
xuki 7y ago
Audi A8 has it: https://youtu.be/TchqhDUbP8w?t=342 https://youtu.be/TchqhDUbP8w?t=342 It's gonna be a long time before mainstream car adopt this though.
- pfortuny 7y ago
  Oh dear. That must be my next car. Unfortunately, it just cannot be... Glad it is at least being researched. Thanks for the (very precise) link!
- wumms 7y ago
  For my eye, Bose's suspension seemed smoother: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3KPYIaks1UY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3KPYIaks1UY And it had Turbo-Boost (same video with cue-in): https://youtu.be/3KPYIaks1UY?t=81 https://youtu.be/3KPYIaks1UY?t=81
- kube-system 7y ago
  > a long time The Ford Edge has had the option since 2015. Looks like the Explorer got it the next year. The Subaru Ascent has it for 2019. I'm sure there are others that didn't come up in the first couple pages of my search results.
tim_hutton 7y ago
Or camera feeds on the road that the car can access, to allow the driver to see around corners ahead of them.

darkcha0s 7y ago

The point being that a camera could just film the entire surroundings and show you that picture, instead of exactly what you are able to see through the mirror reflection- i.e. you're constantly seeing your entire blind spot, not just the part the mirror is showing you for your head location.

fortran77 7y ago

A mirror reflects a 3D image. An LCD screen isn't 3D.

OrwellianChild 7y ago

I think that parallax aside, the benefit of cameras is that a much wider angle can be represented. Much like current reverse-cameras in vehicles, the camera can capture wide/ultra-wide angles of 120-170 degrees. This lets you see everything without craning for parallax. Guidelines can be overlaid for curb/parking situations on demand. Additionally, many auto companies are already augmenting their backup cameras with 360-degree stitched top-down views, which are excellent for curb-centering, etc.

bakies 7y ago
You can also curve mirrors for a wider angle, see it on trucks all the time.
- kube-system 7y ago
  Or on the passenger side mirror of any average passenger car made over the past half century or so: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objects_in_mirror_are_closer_than_they_appear https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objects_in_mirror_are_closer_t...
- OrwellianChild 7y ago
  The point is, switching to cameras has aerodynamic efficiencies. Mirrors are currently a necessary cost that cameras could replace to improve drag coefficients, improve fuel economy/range, etc. OP's concern was that the cameras would not provide sufficient substitution for the mirror's features. I'm arguing that wide field of view solves that problem.
  - beached_whale 7y ago
    So could another camera in the car that watches the drivers head and adjusts the view based on movements. It could also be better too as you can now be comfortable and not contorted to get a proper view(even better than adjusting the mirror). It could also be disabled to provide a stead view. With a touch screen we could stay focused on a target too. Camera's provide more options
  - 7y ago

TylerE 7y ago

Most new cars have parking sensors of some kind. Synthetic 360 vision camera systems are starting to become common on luxury cars and even available on some more down-market models...and those provide way more visibility than any mirror ever will.

com2kid 7y ago

A fancy enough camera system can give you a wide FOV and accurate distance indicators to everything on screen. Parallax is one way we estimate distances, technology can do a lot better than "move head side to side to get a rough idea." Now getting people used to wide FOV, that may be challenging. Find an FPS that lets you set the FOV to anything you want, set it to 180. After a couple of minutes you can get used to it. Beyond 180 it is hard! But even 190 or so is doable after a bit of practice. Not sure how the general public would do with that though! (At what point has a high enough % of the general public played FPSs that such a UI could be gotten away with?)

kazinator 7y ago

I would say, what is also lacking are resolution, dynamic range, and latency. Regarding the latter, even if it's a closed circuit analog system with no digital buffering, there is still frame refresh to consider. At night, if the display isn't dark enough, it will act as a light source, interfering with the driver's night vision. Black has to be black, and dark objects that would be visible with the naked eye via mirror had better be visible with the camera.

tobtoh 7y ago
I'd assume this isn't really a problem these days? Aren't OLED screen capable of high resolution, dynamic range (include true black) and low latency? The main issue would probably be cost, but at a technical level having a suitable screen for car mirrors shouldn't be a problem.
- Piskvorrr 7y ago
  Yeah, throwing money at it could realistically bring this from just-around-the-corner FM to Actual Machines. Not quite there for COTS equipment yet, for cost-saving reasons (fast processing needs beefy HW, which is expensive in itself, needs higher and smoother power, cooling, etc.).

randyrand 7y ago

which also gives you a much better sense of depth too as you move your head.

neuralRiot 7y ago

Not only parallax, mirrors reflections are also 3D.