i have noticed similar camera lags if i put my car on reverse immediately after getting in. if i wait ~30s or so before shifting to reverse, there's no lag from what i can tell.
Well, I'd like to get some clarity on the terminologies in this "camera-lag" conversation:I've had this happen a few times after the last update. Almost had a heart attack the first time because I was trying to reverse into my garage but something felt off and stopped the car only to realize the cameras had some latency. Ever since then I'm always checking if there's any latency in the cameras before parking.
As a (former) software engineer, I suspect that there isn't straightforward answer to this, even from people on the Lucid software team. These are complex systems with many interacting components that work differently when tested in isolation or as part of the overall system. At its lowest level, video cameras produce frames of pixels as a consistent rate. The Air contains a distributed system with dozens of separate computers that talk to each other over a local network. So the camera has to get the video data to the system that runs the infotainment, that system has to process it, then get it up on the screen. Slowdowns could happen at any (or multiple) points in that process.So, is this:
> a camera delay problem?
> a hardware (e.g., speed of processing by the car's computer) problem?
> or a Software problem?
Like to hear your opinions.
Interesting. I don't think I experience rear view camera lag but if I put the car in reverse too quickly, the 360 view is dark with the little "working" circle. Since backing out is pretty tight, I put it back into park for a few seconds and try again after a few seconds. Seems to always do the trick...i have noticed similar camera lags if i put my car on reverse immediately after getting in. if i wait ~30s or so before shifting to reverse, there's no lag from what i can tell.
I concur with your response.As a (former) software engineer, I suspect that there isn't straightforward answer to this, even from people on the Lucid software team. These are complex systems with many interacting components that work differently when tested in isolation or as part of the overall system. At its lowest level, video cameras produce frames of pixels as a consistent rate. The Air contains a distributed system with dozens of separate computers that talk to each other over a local network. So the camera has to get the video data to the system that runs the infotainment, that system has to process it, then get it up on the screen. Slowdowns could happen at any (or multiple) points in that process.
One solution that is sometimes suggested because it is easy to understand is to replace the main computer with a faster one. This often shows improvement, but might just be hiding the symptoms rather than solving them. It could be that the underlying problem is the car's network getting overloaded--maybe six cameras all sending video streams while some other computer modules are booting up and requesting firmware is too much at once. Maybe there's some event that the system designers thought would be a rare occurrence, but turns out to now happen every time the car turns on, so needs to be handled better. Hopefully Lucid has clever people working on this, and there is not a fundamental flaw in the system design that can't be solved with some programming.
The cameras are useful as an indicator, but they are not as accurate as your eyes. The rear view camera is the one likely to lag least.I concur with your response.
I don't think the issue are the "Cameras" per se. I think it is more likely the congestion/resource-contention in the computing and networking system in the car.
If so, this calls into question whether the architecture of the car's computing system and data traffic congestion and priority (or lack thereof) of executing certain tasks might result in excessive delays in the camera information.
If, indeed, the cameras are for "entertainment" only and cannot be used as "real-time" images, do they serve any useful purposes? Or is it just for "show"? For people using these camera views for backup and lane change, are they at risk? This is not a Lucid specific question. I am posing this question generally.
I have always discounted the "3D top view" camera as "for entertainment only" as it is "not real", laggy, and contains artifacts. However, I am much more concerned about the side-view cameras for lane change. I think it is more a marketing candy than an useful tool.
If these cameras are laggy, and laggy can be lagging by as much as hundred of mill-seconds to almost a second, do these cameras do more harm than good?
If you look closely on the dash display of images of other cars in lanes next to yours, you will notice that the cars in the adjacent lanes are already right next to you or even passing you before they show up on your screen.
I think this issue deserves more attention as it imparts on safety. I don't know how Lucid's computer system and its execution priorities/interrupts are architected. Perhaps someone far more knowledgeable than I can enlighten us.
I presume the car's ADAS system does not rely solely on the cameras and looks at more than just the cameras as inputs!
Understandable, so to be clear if your camera "doesn't work" why should the manufacturer be on the hook if you damage your car using a feature that "doesn't work"??? Not saying the lag is acceptable but by your definition if your car or software doesn't do something perfectly every single time it doesn't work.What is the point of the camera feature if it doesn't work? And let me be clear, if something like that doesn't work "sometimes" that's the definition of "doesn't work".
Do you know what they don't say that the display might not show the reality and put that legalese nonsense?
Because they don't want to admit that their software is buggy.
I think the difference here is that "working" backup camera is actually legally required and written out in FMVSS 111 and it would be a recall(and subject of many recalls by many manufacturers) if it fails to display within 2 seconds of shifting to reverse, however the definition of "working" doesn't mention anything about latency/lag and people are saying they are comparable.Understandable, so to be clear if your camera "doesn't work" why should the manufacturer be on the hook if you damage your car using a feature that "doesn't work"??? Not saying the lag is acceptable but by your definition if your car or software doesn't do something perfectly every single time it doesn't work.
And if you've ever read that 99.8% of terms of service that you hit accept without a cult reading that "legalese" is everywhere. Probably to stop people from suing or expecting compensation from every single thing.
Opened my door without looking law suit the car should have told me
Changed lanes without checking the blind spot and almost running some off the road, the car should have told me.
Texting while driving down the highway with DDP engaged and hitting another car. The company should have told me I shouldn't
And so on and so forth...
No debate the driver should be alert and monitors his/her surroundings.The cameras are useful as an indicator, but they are not as accurate as your eyes. The rear view camera is the one likely to lag least.
I use the cameras, and particularly the overhead, all the time. But I go slow and watch carefully to ensure things are updating. If they aren’t, I use my eyes. And I always double check with my eyes either way.
ADAS uses cameras, US sensors, radar, and lidar.
I don't think they are. In older cars most of the sensors would be wired up to a CAN bus connected to some ECU(s) which are then connected to beepers and maybe the screen. You still have multiple computers that can fail. Additionally, CAN bus "networks" are usually a chain of devices, relying on each one to "pass to the left" any message not addressed to it. If any one of those devices fails, the chain fails and the message is lost.In older cars that have parking/proximity sensors (e.g., US), I think they are stand-alone alerts. Correct me if I am wrong.