3 ms·
2000 pictures per day doesn't sound like much (a bit more than 2 pictures on average per minute) but this really adds up even at the resolution of this camera,
by tisme 14y ago
2000 pictures per day doesn't sound like much (a bit more than 2 pictures on average per minute) but this really adds up even at the resolution of this camera, they claim about 1.5 TB / camera / year. Uploading and storing that much data for a large number of users in a reliable and cost effective manner is a non-trivial exercise.
So the big question is what their monthly fee is and I think this project should disclose those (projected) fees and not just the price of the device because it could very well be that those monthly fees will be the large component.
- terhechte 14y agoI guess I'd rather have less photo quality and less space requirements. For this specific use case, I guess 3 Megapixel would be sufficient, and then save it not as jpeg but in jpeg2000 or another wavelet compression, at best with a solid compression rate.
- mike-cardwell 14y agoThe images could naturally degrade over time too. Ie, older photos are compressed more. Although the process of fetching an image, compressing it, and replacing it, might be more trouble than the storage saving is worth. Could keep every nth photo as full resolution maybe.
- jonmrodriguez 14y agoYou probably just re-invented what the brain may be doing as our "memories fade": re-compressing (and culling) to free up space, with storage surprisingly expensive. :)
- joesb 14y agoI guess their killer algorithm is going to be on determining the "relevant" picture to be kept in full resolution.
- megablast 14y agoA lot of photos will be the same or very similar.