Quote:
Originally Posted by CalTran
Not that I disagree with the prospect of video replays (though I have my own reservations about it), but where does the budget for the proposed 10 "necessary" 1080p cameras come from? I would much rather something like Ryan Dognaux's St. Louis set up that anywhere can set up at minimal cost.
|
My proposal isn't for the actual system that would be deployed to every field. It's a proposal for what's needed if you want to determine what sort of video replay system is needed. The goal is to answer the question: "what's the minimal setup needed to correct most incorrect referee calls" with data.
The best way to do this is to capture a bunch of data, and score every match under differing sets of assumptions using independent reviewers. Setting up a camera or two, and only allowing a maximum of 8 samples (one challenge per alliance, playoffs only) won't provide enough data to convince anyone to act.
The question I'm trying to answer is the percentage of time these variations prevent a review from correcting a missed call:
* lack of time sync
* low resolution
* slow shutter speeds (blurry)
* bad camera mounting (blurry)
* lack of depth of field (blurry)
* is 30fps adequate?
* bad point of view
For example, consider the FPS value. A robot moving at 10 feet per second moves 4" per frame at 30 frames per second. Is that enough that, in most situations, the correct call can be made?
I missed one thing on my list -- you need the match time, matched with the video.