So I have a similar set up. But I am unable to see the IR projections as well as a OAK-D Pro. For the FFC-4P set up I have:

  • 2x OAK-FFC OV9282s Monos setup as stereo
  • 1x OAK-FFC AR0234 M12
  • 1x OAK-FFC IR sensor

Whenever I run the depthai/depth_sdk/examples/stereo.py example script the output looks very different the FFC-4P and the OAK-D Pro.

I have also tried just running the mono_preview.pyscript with only one Mono camera enabled. Yet I can barely see the dot projections. They are only visible on objects up close.

Is there something that I am missing here?

The OAK-FFC OV9282 i ordered from the Luxonis shop are NOT IR sensitive as they have IR filters on the lens. It does not say this on the shop webpage unfortunately, and the documentation page lists a lot of OV9282 variations. some are IR sensitive and some are not. I've decided to go a different route.

We will be updating the store asap and adding additional info, we apologize for the inconvenience.

The silk screen on the IR board is backwards from what I can tell with my multimeter. I don't see the schematics for this board in the repo anywhere. I'm tracing leads and the pin on the DIP for 2 has continuity to pin 2 on the OAK 4p board like it should, but on the IR board the silkscreen for 1-10 appears to be backwards since continuity is on pin 8 there. also just looking at the boards you can tell the screen is backwards.

6 months later

Hi @erik , I see you have updated the OAK-FFC OV9282 page to say "IR Sensitive: With IR filter", thank you. However, it looks like all of the camera modules have IR filters. Why would you do that? How are we supposed to use the IR projection or illumination offered by the FFC system in that case? Is there an advantage to using cameras with IR filters that we should be aware of?

Hi @pzhine ,
For all future batches the OAK-FFC-OV9282 will have bandpass filter instead, but we still have about 50pcs in stock before we manufacture another batch of these. If you are interested in these FFC-OV9282 /w bandpass filter we can also ship from EU office where we'd glue CCM onto the CBA (FFC PCBA), which doesn't take much time. Please contact support@luxonis.com if that would be of interest.
Thanks, Erik

Hi @erik , thanks for the quick response! Can you clarify what you mean by "bandpass filter"? What bands does it allow? What is the reason for that type of filter?

Thanks,

Paul

Hi @pzhine ,
Sorry for not clarifying - it's BP @ 940nm, so same wavelength as the dot projector/illumination LED. So that way the sensor would perceive visible light + 940nm.

Thanks @erik , I now have a clear understanding of the current and upcoming cameras. My final question is about whether cutting part (in the case of the upcoming bandpass cameras) or all (as in the current cameras) of the infrared spectrum reduces low-light performance of the cameras. I am not referring to a "night-vision" situation where the scene is specifically illuminated by an IR light source, but rather a scene with low levels of light from a visible light source (e.g. incandescent elements).

Hi @pzhine ,
If there would be a light source that produces mostly IR light, then having no IR filter would benefit the low-lgiht performance. But since it's only bandpass (filtering out all IR except around 940nm), this wouldn't be much of a benefit. Thoughts?

I think we would need to do some comparison tests. We currently use an OAK-D Pro W in our prototype, but are not using the IR features and would like to move to a more modular format (thus the move to the FFC components). Do you know if the OV9282 imagers in the OAK-D Pro W have the bandpass filter? Knowing the difference between the cameras will help us do a low-light performance study.

    pzhine
    OV9282 sensors on the PRO versions have the bandpass (940nm) filter, since the main differentiating factor from non-pro models are the laser-dot projector (for active stereo) and floodlight, which both produce IR light at 940nm. OV9282 cameras serve as the stereo pair and therefore need to be able to perceive the IR light.

    Thanks,
    Jaka