5 ms·

I am not a welder. That being said, I'd imagine the active circuitry required to capture and process the images in realtime (or 30fps, in this case) is expensi

I am not a welder. That being said, I'd imagine the active circuitry required to capture and process the images in realtime (or 30fps, in this case) is expensive and bulkier than what's currently used. Processing stereoscopic 2048x2048 HDR streams is no easy task, you'd basically be looking at a VR helmet once you consider where to put battery and compute unit. It's a cool invention, but probably one of those "analog computer" ideas that's harder to scale/apply than the cheaper alternatives.

convolvatron 4y ago
welding helmets can exceed $1k already. and at a working minimum of $80/hr, if you can improve quality and reduce time (rework is the worst thing here - it never comes out right, takes forever, and so its often more cost effective to start the work from the beginning), the economics might easily work out..especially at the higher end
PanMan 4y ago
Obviously the high dynamic range is a challenge, but besides that: car reverse camera's cost a few bucks, I don't think this would need to be Way more expensive. It also doesn't have to be stereoscopic and 2048x2048 I'd say... - it would quickly be a step up from the current solution which only allows you to see the welding arc
- throwway120385 4y ago
  A car's reverse camera doesn't have the dynamic range to filter headlights at night, much less an arc that's hot enough to give you a sunburn.
  - bri3d 4y ago
    You could just use two cameras, or even four, or eight cameras! Each with a different level of filter. Camera sensors are cheap. Degradation of the sensors on the "bright" cameras would be an issue, however.
nullc 4y ago
Welding helmets are bulky, VR headsets are similar. Lets parts in a helmet but the helmet needs to protect your face and neck from sunburn and potentially bits of metal (depending on your position). And any processing bulk could be belt worn or even sitting on the ground connected by a cable: you're already tethered to the welder and buffer gas tank after all!

convolvatron 4y ago

welding helmets can exceed $1k already. and at a working minimum of $80/hr, if you can improve quality and reduce time (rework is the worst thing here - it never comes out right, takes forever, and so its often more cost effective to start the work from the beginning), the economics might easily work out..especially at the higher end

PanMan 4y ago

Obviously the high dynamic range is a challenge, but besides that: car reverse camera's cost a few bucks, I don't think this would need to be Way more expensive. It also doesn't have to be stereoscopic and 2048x2048 I'd say... - it would quickly be a step up from the current solution which only allows you to see the welding arc

throwway120385 4y ago
A car's reverse camera doesn't have the dynamic range to filter headlights at night, much less an arc that's hot enough to give you a sunburn.
- bri3d 4y ago
  You could just use two cameras, or even four, or eight cameras! Each with a different level of filter. Camera sensors are cheap. Degradation of the sensors on the "bright" cameras would be an issue, however.

nullc 4y ago

Welding helmets are bulky, VR headsets are similar. Lets parts in a helmet but the helmet needs to protect your face and neck from sunburn and potentially bits of metal (depending on your position). And any processing bulk could be belt worn or even sitting on the ground connected by a cable: you're already tethered to the welder and buffer gas tank after all!