In
the automotive world Sales and Marketing types like to talk to about
cross-shopping. The three series BMW is often cross-shopped with the
Audi A4, the VW Beetle with the Mini. In other words, consumers are
smart enough to check out competitive products before plunking down
their hard-earned.
So
here's my question: how often do you cross-shop vision systems?
I'll
bet the answer is “practically never.” I'll bet that when you
need a smart camera you call your friendly local electrical
bits-and-bobs distributor and ask what he can offer. If he carries
Cognex, that's what you'll get. If he works with Omron, or Panasonic,
well guess what you'll be using.
Is
this a smart way to buy machine vision? I don't think so.
I'm
shopping for a new car right now. I figured out my needs, (interior
space, good gas mileage, good warranty,) and my budget, and now I'm
compiling a spreadsheet where I can compare the models that meet my
constraints. The final decision will still involve some subjective
criteria – how it looks, how it feels – but I'm comfortable with
that because I know I'll be working from a base of quantifiable data
and will be making an informed decision.
I
think we should buy vision systems the same way. There are a lot of
vendors out there with products that differ but all have strengths
and weaknesses. So before you buy a Matrox Iris, a Banner
PresencePlus P4, or a Cognex InSight, figure out your needs and see
which fits best. That way you won't be buying a Maserati when what
you need is a minivan.
Posts
3 comments:
Your argument works if you know about all the details you are asking for. In image processing you can describe your needs and you have a good knowledge about the technical details behind the surface. But what about person who are not that experienced?
I'm wondering what happens if you have an application that is solvavle with a Checker but you are offered an InSight plus illumination plus integration support. You have to trust your contact person as you don't have that much experience.
Is trusting "one for all" fair in this situation? What, if you know your needs but not how to solve it?
In my long experience in the machine vision industry I would say its 90% the other way round. The customer has purchased a minvan when they actually need a Maserati..
There are negatives in shopping around for vision systems, especially from the perspective of an integration house. Having worked on several different systems, the first negative that we encounter is the learning curve for anything new. The increased integration time can make up the difference in hardware cost. The second thing is platform limitations. Without going up the learning curve, it is impossible to know the limitations are for a given platform. More specifically what are the limitations for a given platform performing a given inspection and meeting the customer requirements. If you get to the 11th hour on a project and something is in the way of meeting a required level of performance then the only thing that you can do is change out the whole system (which is far more costly). This is why we tend to spend a bit more on hardware, favour powerful systems over simple-to-use, and use what we already know.
Post a Comment