bushlurker 45 Posted November 29, 2009 Hmm, very interesting. I'm tempted to go out and buy one Heheh... me too! Meantime, as promised, heres a quick capture of my cam settings window for my previously mentioned A4tech cam... Nothing particularly surprising here... everything cranked down almost to minimum, colour off, bandwidth and contrast up, brightness and exposure down - automatic everything off... One handy part is the Reset, Save and Restore buttons... Once all these "tracking settings" are set they can be saved with the "save" button, and recalled at any time with the "restore" button... which means when you want to use the webcam as a webcam you can just come in here and click "reset" and revert to standard factory settings with a single click... later, to go back to tracking mode, you can just click "restore"... Instant Ezee cam mode switching... B Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mr.g-c 6 Posted November 29, 2009 Well here in germany used (in terms of rarely used - claimed by the sellers) PS3 Eyes are going out on ebay between 15€ and 30€..... The material for a self-made 3-LED Clip is maximum 10€, so here in worst case i spend 40€ for a great head-tracking device....:D P.S. I personally won't buy a new PS3 Eye, i can't stand the feeling of damaging a new hardware-device :p:rolleyes::cool: Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MehMan 0 Posted November 29, 2009 (edited) Heh, yeah, germany. I'm from Slovenia, which is much smaller and thus not a lot of eyes for sale. I only see one second hand one, and it's on for 44€! That's mental! A new one is 40€! I might call him and offer him 30€ for it and take it off him. Or just buy it off ebay, I can get it for like 30€ there, even less. RE the colour input only: Can't the FT interface make it into B&W and set the exposure really high? Edited November 29, 2009 by MehMan Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Leon86 13 Posted November 29, 2009 I made a freetrack headtracking thingy last summer, works great only it eats up quite a bit of cpu time. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gedis 0 Posted November 29, 2009 (edited) wow, really interesting topic and I might cought interest in freetrack, which i lost looking at trackir price. here's what i found: 5QqAqb_SZV0 P.S. is there a way to make track clip wireless? Edited November 29, 2009 by Gedis Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MehMan 0 Posted November 29, 2009 (edited) I made a freetrack headtracking thingy last summer, works great only it eats up quite a bit of cpu time. That's the other thing that bothers me. The PS3 eye might be great, but if the drivers eat up 30% of your CPU and FT takes up another chunk, then it might not be the most optimal solution. Another question with the LEDs: viewing angle. I can only find IR leds with a viewing angle of 40°, FT recommends more. I've found some LEDs that tick all the boxes, BUT the viewing angle. I found a SFH485P LED, which should be just it, but the viewing angle is confusing me. On one site it says it's 40°, on another it's supposed to be 160°. Huh? Edited November 29, 2009 by MehMan Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rundll.exe 12 Posted November 29, 2009 I found that the LED view (actually spread) angle is very important, while i did experiments with the TV remote. Imagine a normal LED shining on the wall, you see a quite crisp circle. In this circle the webcam must be to see the IR led. Maybe some matte foil could be applied over the leds to make the light more diffuse, but that might be a problem for accuracy. Its actually no problem with the passive method (in 1st post and what im going for) if you have spheres as reflectors, since the light always goes back to its source (near the webcam) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MehMan 0 Posted November 30, 2009 Well, this is my dilemma. Conrad says the SFH485P has a viewing angle of 40°. While Farnell says it has a viewing angle of 160°. Both are supposed to be the same product. Osram on the other hand is saying the same as conrad. And this is supposed to be enough? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
frag85 10 Posted November 30, 2009 If you want the smoothest tracking with Free-Track, go the WII mote route, 0 CPU usage and a stable 120FPS (or 100?), and a high resolution. a standard webcam with 30FPS can be very smooth or responsive, but not at the same time like the Wiimote. As soon as I get a bluetooth adapter I will be posting up my review of the wiimote on the free-track forums, but that might not be untill Christmas time. i also intend on making the wiimote USB powered. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mr.g-c 6 Posted November 30, 2009 I doubt that any webcam on the market eats more than 5% CPU time... In Freetrack-Forums and wherever i read about it, average its around 1-2% CPU utilization. But yes someone should try it with the PS3 Eye.... i will buy one certainly! :D Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bushlurker 45 Posted November 30, 2009 (edited) Though I prefer the reflective method myself currently, I made a quick LED sideclip for a friend once... it was made out of a "3 for £1" bicycle light which happened to contain 3xLED's and an on/off switch/battery pack - so I just used the white visible light one... It tracked fine, but yes - the LED's domed top made for a very poor viewing angle... Following a tip on the Freetrack forum I found a very fine file and simply filed the domed LED flat - increased the viewing angle dramatically and the whole deal worked great till my friends IR cam came in the post... Also yes - I made the reflectors spheres to maximise the effective tracking angle - the sideclip style in particular benefits from that... particularly since my screen setup is really wide, so I might turn my head a lot, and the clip can "disappear behind your head" if you have to turn too far (thats also the reason for the offset cam with sideclip-style)... The few reflector rigs I've actually seen have all been caps - I've never heard of a reflective clip, so I was guessing all the way a bit - most caps just had spots - a couple had slightly convex tracking points (naturalpoints reflec hatclip tracking points are concave - not sure why), but spheres seemed the obvious shape... PS - here's the relevant bit on LED's from the Freetrack Hardware FAQ... (where there's also a nice illustration of the standard proportions for hatclips and sideclips)... The LEDs fade away when I turn my head only a small amount.The viewing angle of your LEDs is too small, increase the viewing angle by filing the LED lens tips down flat, almost to the metal part and then make the final finish transparent matte (not too shiny, not too rough). Alternatively you can buy wide angle IR LEDs like SFH485P or equivalent (+/-40 degrees half angle). These LEDs are unlikely to be available from consumer electronics shops, instead try major distributors like Farnell and RS Components or through a specialist like LumiTronix. I can't find SFH485P LEDs or the shipping costs are more expensive than the LEDs themselves! Just use standard, widely available infrared LEDs, their viewing angle is too narrow for head tracking but this is easily fixed by filing the lens tips down flat. This reduces their brightness due to a wider emission angle but they're still no less bright than commercially bought wide angle LEDs like SFH485P B Edited November 30, 2009 by Bushlurker Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mr.g-c 6 Posted November 30, 2009 Well, this is my dilemma. Conrad says the SFH485P has a viewing angle of 40°. While Farnell says it has a viewing angle of 160°. Both are supposed to be the same product. Osram on the other hand is saying the same as conrad. And this is supposed to be enough? Standard LED Angles are around 20°, so 40° is already double of it and goes AFAIK in direction of so called "wide-angle-LEDs"... Here i have pictures of 60° "wide-angle" LEDs i installed under the backseats of my car years ago... The illumination is quite "homogeneous" i would claim :D Looks almost like 90°, or at least you can still see it from 90° Angle.... And here is the Quote from Free-Track FAQs (i marked the relevant part with bold text): The LEDs fade away when I turn my head only a small amount.The viewing angle of your LEDs is too small, increase the viewing angle by filing the LED lens tips down flat, almost to the metal part and then make the final finish transparent matte (not too shiny, not too rough). Alternatively you can buy wide angle IR LEDs like SFH485P or equivalent (+/-40 degrees half angle). These LEDs are unlikely to be available from consumer electronics shops, instead try major distributors like Farnell and RS Components or through a specialist like LumiTronix. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Wupjak 0 Posted November 30, 2009 The $2.00 IR LEDs from Radio Shack are more than adequate after filing them flat. I was more than happy to drive 5 minutes to come home with everything I needed rather than having to mail order and worry. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bushlurker 45 Posted November 30, 2009 (edited) Here's a Freetrack tutorial video I came across on YouTube... Not Arma2, but seemed like a good general introduction... (4-point design is a little out-of date... 3 is more than adequate)... <object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-1YOyHPaEQ&hl=en_GB&fs=1&rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-1YOyHPaEQ&hl=en_GB&fs=1&rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object> P.S. is there a way to make track clip wireless? Reflective style tracking doesn't use LED's so doesn't require power or wires... B Edited November 30, 2009 by Bushlurker Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MehMan 0 Posted November 30, 2009 Ah, excellent! Well, conrad can supply me with the LEDs, resistors, fuse and inline fuse holder, now I need to dig up a USB cable of sorts and get the PS3 eye and I'm done! hopefully. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cross 1 Posted November 30, 2009 And of there is this... http://www.cachya.com/esight/overview.php Works only with a print out and uses contrast.. :D :D http://www.cachya.com/esight/steps.php Great when you make your adjustments properly... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Herbal Influence 10 Posted November 30, 2009 (edited) Sorry, as far as I can see cachya is neither open source software nor is it free software. That's completely the wrong direction ... I could buy TrackIR then .. :-( I consider your post - as you deliver no reasons on why we should BUY another proprietary, closed commercial product instead of a free and open one then - as a pure advertisement. :-( Sure, you tell us now, it was just a joke? Edited November 30, 2009 by Herbal Influence Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cross 1 Posted November 30, 2009 well I don't use it myself... I don't know whether it works with ArmA2 even ... Just came across when reading some stuff regarding FaceAPI Facetracking for ArmA2. So ignore if you are not interested..not for ArmA but for other areas of use as well.. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tankbuster 1733 Posted November 30, 2009 (edited) Has anybody made a side by side comparison of FT and TIP? I mean, I can see how FT is tempting, but I can also see why TIP is tempting. While FT is the cheap solution, you see why it's the cheap solution. It can be a bit jerky apparently. And not as smooth as TIP. For some it seems to work just fine, but for some it works like dog shit. I owned both. The one is still use is the TIR. I have the TIR4 with Proclip. I don't have any figures with framerates and such like, but I will say this, TIR performs WAY better than FT. FT was useable, but TIR is better. How much better? Well, that's for the individual to decide. I was lucky to have a little bit of cash to buy a used TIR4 + TCP on eBay. For me it was worthwhile. Is a TIR5 good value for money compared to FT? Definitely not unless you have the appropriate amount of disposable cash. What specifically is different? Framerate and smoothness of tracking is much better under TIR. It seems to be able to track my head to greater angle deflections too before the skull flips and goes mental. It's also more tolerant of other light sources in the room and once you tell it you're using a TCP, there's no messing about measuring your emitter distances. The above said, the TCP is a bit fragile. Even though I'm not an experienced fabricator, the 3 point clip I built for my FT was MUCH more substantial and stronger feeling than the TCP. The TCP always feels like it's on the verge of falling to bits though to be fair, in the year I've had it, it hasn't. :) I can't comment on current versions of software, but when I used it, FT was crashing too often for my liking. IIRC it was something to do with all the emitters getting into the same horizontal plane that made the FT software spack out. The TIR software has never crashed. FT did use a certain amount of CPU and memory, but I'm lucky enough to have a machine powerful enough so that it never became a problem. In short, if you can afford it, get TIR. I'd suggest that TIR5 is a bit over the top and expensive. Try to get a 3 or 4 version but do get the Track Clip Pro. If you can't afford TIR, FT won't disappoint. Edited November 30, 2009 by Tankbuster Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bushlurker 45 Posted November 30, 2009 Good post Tankbuster! Much like I said myself - the one stop pro solution is a TIR rig, but I've heard several stories about just how fragile that trackclip is... scary for such an expensive item! A bit of playing with curve presets can minimise the mental skull-backflipping in FT, but fine-tuning is a prolonged and picky business - much like Arma2 itself... mainly because FT is designed to accomodate such a huge variety of setups... with TIR it's plug and play all the way precisely because it won't work with anything else... B Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tankbuster 1733 Posted November 30, 2009 Yes, you're right Mr Lurker, the tweaking is an art, one that I didn't get too involved in. You can tweak and twiddle FT if you want, but I found TIR worked as I expected and wanted right out of the box If you're wondering why I changed? When I found FT didn't work with ArmA II, I went out and bought my TIR4. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fincuan 0 Posted November 30, 2009 Much like I said myself - the one stop pro solution is a TIR rig, but I've heard several stories about just how fragile that trackclip is... scary for such an expensive item! One more from me: After a few months of use it just broke at the lower "joint" when I adjusted it. I returned it to the shop and got a new one, which broke, which I returned to the shop and got a new one... etc... After the third one I just started repairing it with duct tape, which has worked well so far. It is VERY fragile and not durable at all. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MehMan 0 Posted November 30, 2009 For me it's more of a question of investment. I can buy a TIR, I know it's a penny well spent IF you use it daily. I don't intend to use it on a daily basis, more like once a week. Thus it's a bit too much to get a 150$ or 200$ addition for gaming. It's like the wacom tablet I bought, I hardly ever use it now. Now if I could get a similar preformance from building my own stuff(and I love building my own stuff) then I'll be a happy puppy. The stats for the PS3 eye are good enough for me to give it a chance. I like tinkering with software so it's worth a try. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mr.g-c 6 Posted December 1, 2009 I just found out that the PS3 Eye is sold brand-new (OEM) for 19.95€.... Lol, if the people buying these cams at ebay for almost 35€ sometimes, would only know this.... Hehe. http://www.computeruniverse.net/products/90355438.asp?agent=288 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Leon86 13 Posted December 1, 2009 Anybody try the wii-mote option? http://www.dealextreme.com/details.dx/sku.32010 If this thing works it might be the best and cheapest solution. Under 14 euro's + free shipping. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
