News and discussions about image sensors
His talk is actually very similar to my two previous Electronic Imaging talks about EMVA1288 already published years ago.Papers for download here:http://www.aphesa.com/downloads/download2.php?id=4http://www.aphesa.com/downloads/download2.php?id=5
Imitation is the greatest form of flattery, they say. You should feel happy! As a relative old-timer, I feel that way often!
Arnaud, it is indeed frustrating if others "steal" your material. But I quickly checked your references you mention. And then I asked myself, what is original stuff in Arnaud's papers ? I came to the conclusion that your material in your papers is also taken from others. You use the formulas as well as the figures copied from the EMVA1288 docs ....
As a member of the EMVA1288 working group who wrote a part of the standard since 2006, indeed it is hard to put a limit between my work and the standard. But point grey has not really contributed to the standard.What shocks me is that all the work we do for the standard is almost unnoticed but as soon as one of the big guys gives one talk, he is video taped, published, blogged and Vision Systems Design makes its editorial page about it. Very frustrating.
Actually, the standard was covered in many posts, just search the blog for EMVA 1288. One of the posts mentions your company's characterization system:http://image-sensors-world.blogspot.co.il/2011/07/aphesa-offers-emva1288-tester.html
Arnaud, why not feel happy that someone else is promoting your work? As far as they refer to EMVA 1288, your contribution is appreciated.
I checked the EMVA1288 downloadable material, and I do not see any names of any contributors or contributing companies. There is a page with a list of companies who are EMVA1288 members, but it is not clear which individuals contributed to the standard .... Then it is becoming difficult to refer to names or companies. On the other hand, standards are there to be used by others than the ones who defined the standard ....
Indeed we do not publicly publish the names as it used to be at the beginning but now we have decided to restrict the access to the internal documents to the really participating members (and no longer to the whole mailing list). The voting rights have also been changed so that only members present at the meetings can vote.I don't think the list of active members is confidential, i'm wondering why it is not disclosed. I'll bring this up at the next meeting.
I just wanted to say "thank you" for sharing Mr. Tucakov's talk and Mr. Darmont for posting URLs of your papers.gregg
All comments are moderated to avoid spam.