By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Adinnieken on 18 June 2012
Edit Thread
fillet said:

Also I would like to add...

Wikipedia states that resolution of both cams is 640x480 at 30hz,

so that's 60 images 640x480 uncompressed bitmap = 900kb x 60 = A lot more than 30mb second.

Does not compute.

It does not compute, because even basic webcams are capable of processing and no company would be stupid enough to create a device like Kinect that would send raw bitmap data down a USB2.0 connection, yet you state that Kinect can lower the RGB camera resolution to 320x240, how is this possible? If the cameras have no processing, how can they process the image digitally to then send that to the Xbox 360.

And, if they do have processing, which I say they do as theoretically not possible to stream 640x480 60fps down USB2.0 uncompressed, they will definately have processing algorithm to ignore redundant data (pretty much all image data collected)...

It's just one big red herring.

 

 

Edit.....

 

 

Hold on a minute, I know Wikipedia isn't ALWAYS right, but it states that the camera operates at 30fps...

If it was operating at that speed, then the response time would not be as bad as it is. I'm sure you're right about some of the things you're saying, but your explanation (although far superior to my sentence structure) although well worded, in terms of technical content doesn't really explain the answer to the question of why the USB2.0 bus is saturated.

Wikipedia states 1 camera records in greyscale the other colour, BUT they definately are both 30fps, how can this explain the average lag of around 200ms? Clearly USB2.0 has nothing to do with if Wikipedia is correct.

No, it would appear my information regarding the specs of Kinect is out of date. 

http://kotaku.com/5576002/here-are-kinects-technical-specs