PDA

View Full Version : Chit Chat Custom firmware for e system?



Pitata
04-04-2008, 02:40 PM
I stumbled over this today http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CHDK
Made me wonder what the major cons and pros for an open source firmware from a companies view.
<o:p> </o:p>
It worked for Linksys if i remember correctly.
<o:p> </o:p>
Think of open source firmware in:
<o:p> </o:p>
* Cameras
* Mp3-players
* Motherboards
* Cars!!!
<o:p> </o:p>
Pro: Great for the consumer, patching…
Con: warranty…
<o:p> </o:p>
I'm a bit too tired to list more.
Please share your thoughts

tspore
04-04-2008, 02:49 PM
I think its an issue of control. If the product gets bricked the consumer will want a refund, but the manufracture will say no way. It is similar to the DNG file. Really from Olympus' point of view with ORF they produce a product which gives a very good picture. However, with DNG and Adobe Raw converter it isn't the same quality of image that they produce. So now we are at the place in which people are blaming the Anti Aliasing filter of the E-3. However, in camera Jpeg's, Studio, even now Aperture (Who was late to the game) produce a very fine picture.

I personally don't want to use Studio to convert my ORF's slow, doesn't save as good highlights, Lightroom is a very nice DAM solution, etc.

I don't say this to bash Adobe, they have come a long ways, and still use Lightroom quite a bit.

But people and poor reviewers are blaming the camera for software issues. I think that if Olympus allows for open source firmware a similar occurrence will happen.

gianca_4_3rds
04-04-2008, 05:36 PM
A lot of the problems that RAW developers have arise from the fact that most camera manufacturers do not make their file format open, forcing the other parties to resort to reverse engineering, with mixed results...
I honestly wish everyone would use DNG, or even TIFF's as raw format like PhaseOne does, because I believe a closed file format system is bad for everyone in the long term, including the camera manufacturers.

I agree on firmware thought: meddling with the camera firmware could easily brick your camera, so I understand manufacturers would be hesitant to do so...
SDK takes time to develop to make sure nobody could make serious damage... as an example, look at the iPhone (I know it's not the same thing as camera): it took Apple one year to release the SDK for it.
But as cameras will evolve more and more closer to a computer I believe a SDK for the camera themselves will be just a matter of time.


I think its an issue of control. If the product gets bricked the consumer will want a refund, but the manufracture will say no way. It is similar to the DNG file. Really from Olympus' point of view with ORF they produce a product which gives a very good picture. However, with DNG and Adobe Raw converter it isn't the same quality of image that they produce. So now we are at the place in which people are blaming the Anti Aliasing filter of the E-3. However, in camera Jpeg's, Studio, even now Aperture (Who was late to the game) produce a very fine picture.

I personally don't want to use Studio to convert my ORF's slow, doesn't save as good highlights, Lightroom is a very nice DAM solution, etc.

I don't say this to bash Adobe, they have come a long ways, and still use Lightroom quite a bit.

But people and poor reviewers are blaming the camera for software issues. I think that if Olympus allows for open source firmware a similar occurrence will happen.

Pitata
04-06-2008, 08:24 AM
That was not really what i had in mind but great point. I meant more like scripting programs for options, changing buttons and so on. Customizing in general. I suppose it's possible to lock the orf properties.

250swb
04-06-2008, 01:57 PM
The idea of 'modules' you could either download or make for yourself, perhaps leaving out much of the functions you never use, or adding others, is a great idea, in principle. The problem would be the jerks, and there are many, who would download profiles, or make custom profiles, based on a poor understanding of photography and digital capture and then report half assed comments about why the camera doesn't work. Of course a camera manufacturer couldn't take into account the blatherings of idiots so they would lose much credibility in such a situation. It wouldn't be a business plan.

tspore
04-06-2008, 02:35 PM
I wouldn't mind open source firmware, I am just trying to think of all the reasons not to have it.
Really the .ORF is pretty open from what I read. No real encryption, the Exif can be easily read, though not always understood by many, etc.
The more I think about it, the more I think it would be a bad idea.
There are already to many loud speakers, who don't understand what we are given already, to expand the options of the system, via open firmware, I think would cause those loud mouths even more ammo, when something goes wrong.