I'm a bit confused by how they priced some of these things, can anyone help me understand?
• Deep Neural Networks Module: $150k
Considering how important deep learning is for computer vision and image processing in general now, this is a very important. But will this be a completely new library for both training and inference? Why not use what's already out there, like Pytorch or ONNX? $150k pays for 1-3 developers for a year, depending on where they live.
• Accelerated image processing: $150k
I don't know what this means in practice, refactoring the code adding more SIMD code? OpenCL kernels? Again, the price tag seems steep, but maybe they will hire an expert for half a year?
• Improved support for fisheye camera calibration: [$100k + hardware ($20k approx) shared with multi-camera support]
I know OpenCV is often used with very expensive research cameras, but couldn't this development be done with a couple GoPros? If companies want to certify it for their esoteric cameras let them pay for the added expenses.
• $700k stretch goal, CI and build server.
Does this cost $100k?
Don't get me wrong, I like OpenCV, I've used it and will donate to this, but I don't get how these things can cost that much for an open source project. There's no price attached to the improved documentation and tutorials, those are important and take a lot of time. It's probably faster to write a canny edge detector than writing all the documentation and examples for it.
On a separate note, their $1M stretch goal mentions a future OpenCV cloud service. That seems like something that should be sponsored by one of the cloud providers, or handled by a separate company instead of a crowd funded open source library project.
If you want to do anything plausibly production quality for general use, 150k for these first items seem pretty normal for this type of code.
Calibration also, depending on the scope (could cost a lot more)
Agree scoping on the goals of the deep network would be interesting, but seems plausible to do something useful in, if not too ambitious.
Does this cost $100k?
I don't think you should interpret the stretch milestones that way. I read it as if we get another 100k over X, we'll add a redundant CI system, not "we'll spend 100k on a CI system"
Comments
I'm a bit confused by how they priced some of these things, can anyone help me understand?
• Deep Neural Networks Module: $150k
Considering how important deep learning is for computer vision and image processing in general now, this is a very important. But will this be a completely new library for both training and inference? Why not use what's already out there, like Pytorch or ONNX? $150k pays for 1-3 developers for a year, depending on where they live.
• Accelerated image processing: $150k
I don't know what this means in practice, refactoring the code adding more SIMD code? OpenCL kernels? Again, the price tag seems steep, but maybe they will hire an expert for half a year?
• Improved support for fisheye camera calibration: [$100k + hardware ($20k approx) shared with multi-camera support]
I know OpenCV is often used with very expensive research cameras, but couldn't this development be done with a couple GoPros? If companies want to certify it for their esoteric cameras let them pay for the added expenses.
• $700k stretch goal, CI and build server.
Does this cost $100k?
Don't get me wrong, I like OpenCV, I've used it and will donate to this, but I don't get how these things can cost that much for an open source project. There's no price attached to the improved documentation and tutorials, those are important and take a lot of time. It's probably faster to write a canny edge detector than writing all the documentation and examples for it.
On a separate note, their $1M stretch goal mentions a future OpenCV cloud service. That seems like something that should be sponsored by one of the cloud providers, or handled by a separate company instead of a crowd funded open source library project.
If you want to do anything plausibly production quality for general use, 150k for these first items seem pretty normal for this type of code.
Calibration also, depending on the scope (could cost a lot more)
Agree scoping on the goals of the deep network would be interesting, but seems plausible to do something useful in, if not too ambitious.
I don't think you should interpret the stretch milestones that way. I read it as if we get another 100k over X, we'll add a redundant CI system, not "we'll spend 100k on a CI system"