I understand the desire of academics to help agriculture, but they really need to check in with the field before coming up with prototypes like this, because they are duplicating existing things (ag companies already do this), making hardware that would never survive the field (ag companies already solved this), and obscenely expensive (ag companies come up with better cheaper solutions).
> making hardware that would never survive the field
What I saw in the article was a prototype and see no reason for it to be "field ready."
It might not survive the field but seems fine for greenhouse setting. And a great way to line up a good computer vision engineering job with an ag firm after.
I'm looking at something like this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l4Dc6QNWiIs and I feel like they are doing totally different things. Both harvest tomatoes, but these are totally different approaches.
Really? Can you link to those solutions please ?
> I understand the desire of academics to help agriculture, but they really need to check in with the field before coming up with prototypes like this
Do they? Academia is about the individual. It is not about others. Sometimes what an academic comes up with ends up being applicable to a larger audience, but that's not the goal. Industry is where people try to do things for others.