Difference between Conventional/External Frame Grabber and New Acquisition

techniques –

Devices known as Acquisition Modules are based on digital interfaces like USB, FireWire and
Gigabit Ethernet. These compact, external modules behave like an external frame grabber,
having an interface to one or more cameras at one end and an output to one of the digital
interfaces on the other (USB, FireWire or Gigabit Ethernet) and are used for transferring data
to a PC.

Unlike a traditional frame grabber, these units are external peripheral devices that connect
externally to the PC on which the actual image processing takes place. Modern PCs are
generally already equipped with the requisite external interface. The most widespread interface
is the USB interface, but FireWire and Gigabit Ethernet (“GigE”) have also established. These
channels opened up new possibilities for getting image data into the main memory of the
evaluation PC.

Large range of different acquisition modules are able to capture images from analogue cameras
that support common video standards, from Camera Link cameras or from LVDS cameras.

In principle, these boxes operate in the same way as a frame grabber. They capture the camera
signal, buffer it, sort it if necessary and then transfer it to the PCs RAM across the interface.
Some acquisition modules can be triggered in the same way as a frame grabber, which means
that they autonomously cause the camera to capture an image. Some modules also provide pre-
processing options such as sorting, Bayer-to-RGB conversion. Some manufacturers even offer
boxes which allow several cameras to be connected to a single unit. With these products, the
image data is transferred either in parallel or over multiplexers.

The advantages of acquisition modules-

The big advantage with acquisition modules is their flexibility. On the one hand, there is a huge
variety of mature, readily available analogue, Camera Link and LVDS cameras that can be
used, just as with frame grabbers.
1. On the other hand, these devices make it possible to structure image processing systems
far more flexibly. Unlike a frame grabber, an acquisition module can be installed in a
suitable location up to 100 metres away from the PC. This allows the user a far greater
degree of freedom during integration. In addition, the evaluation PC can be more
compact because a PCI slot is no longer required since an external acquisition module
is being used. And, of course, external connection to the PC also assists integration.

2. In addition, acquisition modules also allow multi-camera systems to be set up easily.

This is where Gigabit Ethernet really comes into its own, as this technology comes from
the world of networking, which means that it is by its very nature, suitable for building
a network from virtually any number of sources and PCs.
The disadvantages of acquisition modules-

1. One important disadvantage of using acquisition modules is data reliability.

With frame grabbers, the physical connection is established using one or more direct
cables. This means that it is always possible to say exactly when and where the signal
is being transmitted, how long the data transmission lasts and when the signal arrives.
With GigE, USB and FireWire, on the other hand, the data is split into packets and then
sent. Even with an extremely simple topology comprising a single camera, a single
acquisition module and a single PC, the precise data transmission path is no longer
predictable. If image processing systems are deployed in a network, it is not even
possible to guarantee reliable delivery of a data packet within a specific time due to the
fact that other devices may have a higher priority.

2. The second disadvantage associated with acquisition modules is that, unlike

CameraLink, analogue or PCI frame grabbers, the actual bandwidth on GigE, USB and
FireWire is not necessarily guaranteed: Either the user utilises the entire data rate, in Commented [Vh1]: I need to look more into this.
which case transmission is not entirely ensured or they give priority to the reliability of
the transmission, which only works at the expense of bandwidth.And it is not possible
with any technology to precisely predict the delay with which the data from the camera
will arrive in main memory. Of course, these disadvantages are only of any significance
where large volumes of data are involved. Commented [Vh2]: Applies for our application since we
are handling large amount of data

Strengths of the frame grabber technology

Where time-critical tasks need to be carried out with the assistance of image processing, it is
vital to be able to predict the exact timing of the data. And it is here that the traditional frame
grabber comes up trumps.
1. No technology offers comparable levels of data reliability coupled with the same
flexibility. The frame grabbers from the Canadian manufacturer DALSA, for example,
offer the possibility of not only detecting data loss, but also of obtaining precise
information about when and where the error occurred during data transfer. This gives
the user or the system a chance to react.
2. In addition to it being a mature technology - tested over many years - a further
advantage of frame grabbers when compared with the acquisition modules is the range
of functions and efficiency offered by their drivers.
3. With FireWire, USB and Gigabit Ethernet, existing drivers, for instance those provided
by Microsoft, may be used, but these are not optimised for image processing. If the
manufacturer writes their own drivers, these are not always compatible with the chipsets
used in the interface hardware on the PC.
Areas where frame grabber technology takes a beat-

1. They always demand greater expertise of the user.

2. In addition, somewhat larger PCs are required, than for acquisition modules, at least for
PCI bus frame grabbers. Since frame grabbers generally deliver a wider range of
functions, they are by nature more complex to operate and generally also somewhat
more expensive than acquisition modules. Since frame grabbers are always installed in
a PC, they also do not provide the flexibility with respect to topology described above.

3. Cameras in which these technologies have already been directly integrated do not need
an acquisition module. However, the user is restricted as to their choice of cameras as
such cameras are not yet widely available. In particular, the choice with respect to
resolution and refresh rate is still extremely limited. This situation will improve
considerably in future; nevertheless, it will undoubtedly be several years before the
current range of analogue, CameraLink and LVDS cameras is matched.
Conclusion

▪ USB and FireWire are flexible interfaces covering the lower end of the data bandwidth.
▪ Frame grabbers will continue to have their place for tasks that require high levels of
data reliability or fast cameras.
▪ In the mid-range Gigabit Ethernet is establish itself successfully.