By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony Discussion - PS EYE can do what NATAL can:

drkohler on 22 May 2010
Theo said:
Sorry joeorc, but I don't understand a thing you said.

The PS eye uses a 2D field of vision, and based on the sizes of the heads of the move controllers it judges the depth.

Natal uses two cameras similar to our eyes only a small distance apart, using the angle to judge the distance as we do. I'm not sure what you mean by this "to see the other side facing" Both have a limited fov, and in their own way a limited sense of depth perception.

Sigh, people should stop arguing with expressions whose definitions seem to escape them. I also have no clue as to what that "see the other side of things" drivel is about. Look, it is very simple:

Sony's wand takes pictures of the room in front of the camera.

MS's Natal takes pictures of the room in front of the camera.

 

For Sony, if it sees a glowing ball, it knows where the hand of the player is (because nonretarded players will use a hand to hold the wand).

Natal uses a pulse modulated ir source and an ir sensitive camera to calculate what shape is standing in front of the camera. If wanted, it can calculate the position of arms,legs and head of the shape, if it is human.

Natal can also take pictures of the room in front of the RGB camera - although this has nothing to do with depth sensing. MS specifically states that Natal does also work in the dark, so the "normal" RGB camera is not used for depth sensing (it is probably used for facial recognition, detecting colors and whatnot. If MS wanted, they can, at any time, build a dildo with a glowing ball and mimick the wand 1:1 (give or take a few milliions in patent rights).



Around the Network
slowmo on 22 May 2010
thismeintiel said:

This whole argument over the tech is pretty dumb.  Especially, if the end result is the same thing.  Just like the Wiimote and Move, it will give you the same end result, albiet Move is more accurate.  Natal will give us the same end result as the PSEye.  Though, I have concerns it won't be as accurate.  And that is definitely not based on some Sony bias, but on every single vid and demo we have seen thus far.  And the fact that most, if not all, those vids are from before the processor was removed doesn't help dispell those concerns. 

@ iron man

You really shouldn't get yourself so hyped up for Natal.  You may be setting yourself up for a huge letdown.  Epsecially, if MS doesn't fix the accuracy issues, and if all the games turn out to be casual titles that are only fun for 20 mins.  Besides, MS didn't invent Ricochet.  Starts at 0:35

 

 

Actually the argument is very valid, you're only saying it's dumb because the specific details of the technology show just how flawed the statement PS Eye can do what Natal can do is.  The resource cost it would take on processing time to do a full body 3D skeletal capture on a person with the PS Eye would be ridiculous.  The camera isn't capable of doing what Natal does in that regard and it certainly couldn't do it at 30FPS with as comparatively little latency as Natal. 

You have ZERO evidence of the release version of Natal to be so negative with regards to accuracy, latency or indeed its software catalogue.  You really should start being more gracious about Natal's tech because you're the one who could actually end up with egg on your face too.  Natal isn't hyped on these boards, just irrationally hated upon by the way.



thismeintiel on 22 May 2010
slowmo said:
thismeintiel said:

This whole argument over the tech is pretty dumb.  Especially, if the end result is the same thing.  Just like the Wiimote and Move, it will give you the same end result, albiet Move is more accurate.  Natal will give us the same end result as the PSEye.  Though, I have concerns it won't be as accurate.  And that is definitely not based on some Sony bias, but on every single vid and demo we have seen thus far.  And the fact that most, if not all, those vids are from before the processor was removed doesn't help dispell those concerns. 

@ iron man

You really shouldn't get yourself so hyped up for Natal.  You may be setting yourself up for a huge letdown.  Epsecially, if MS doesn't fix the accuracy issues, and if all the games turn out to be casual titles that are only fun for 20 mins.  Besides, MS didn't invent Ricochet.  Starts at 0:35

 

 

Actually the argument is very valid, you're only saying it's dumb because the specific details of the technology show just how flawed the statement PS Eye can do what Natal can do is.  The resource cost it would take on processing time to do a full body 3D skeletal capture on a person with the PS Eye would be ridiculous.  The camera isn't capable of doing what Natal does in that regard and it certainly couldn't do it at 30FPS with as comparatively little latency as Natal. 

You have ZERO evidence of the release version of Natal to be so negative with regards to accuracy, latency or indeed its software catalogue.  You really should start being more gracious about Natal's tech because you're the one who could actually end up with egg on your face too.  Natal isn't hyped on these boards, just irrationally hated upon by the way.

The point is, they both do motion capture differently.  PS Eye doesn't need to do a full skeletal capture to achieve it's motion capture.  Its method also allows it to have a refresh rate of either 60 FPS or 120FPS.  Natal can do a skeletal capture.  But, in the end, it doesn't matter how Natal does motion capture, if it's not accurate. 

And you're right, I have no proof that the final version will be like it has been in videos.  That's why I'm not doing the fanboy thing and saying, "Natal sucks!" or "Natal will be crap!"  I'm just looking at it with a skeptic's eye.  The vids I have seen have had tracking issues and they were from before the internal processor was taken out.  Now, the 360 has to do all the calculations, which is said to take 15% of it's processing power.  I just don't have much faith in the product.  Of course, there is still a chance MS can pull it off.

Also, on the flip side, these guys don't have proof that Natal will be incredibly accurate or offer tons of new gaming experiences.  Yet, that doesn't stop them from hyping this thing like the second coming of Christ.  You saying it isn't hyped kinda shows your bias.  Plus, I'm just saying it COULD lead to an ultimate letdown.



 

Cobretti2 on 22 May 2010

I call BS on this video.

No way this guy did those flips over people in his room, or those lighting bolts from his hand lol.

now back to reality I can see how him standing there using fists and kicks works.

However like others I too feel you need a lot of room to play stuff like this. Hence why I think Natal is useless.

I know Americans have big homes but here they are relatively small and about 3x the price too haha.



 

 

chuchy on 22 May 2010

Wow all the fighting come on ppl . The game was trashy but fun and at least we can see that eyetoy isn't that crappy. And all I knowabout nathal is the red ball so idk



Around the Network
Legend11 on 23 May 2010

Next up is the thread "PS1 can do what PS3 can"...



9009pc on 23 May 2010
Cobretti2 said:
I call BS on this video.

No way this guy did those flips over people in his room, or those lighting bolts from his hand lol.

just after 2.30 in the video below Dr marks uses magic with the eyetoy.  I am sure the ps eye would let you do things like that. as for the flips you probably have to do something the camera will recognise like put you hand flat towards it or something or a small jump to give the impression of what you want.  like in the racing game shown for natal at E309 putting your foot forward accelerated.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_PtoxKDcCXc 

natal to me is a good bit more advanced than the ps eye but there is quite alot of feature that the ps eye can do that not many people know about.  its these feature that demonstrate the underlying problem with camera technology for gaming without a controller, and this game does a good job at pointing them out. I hope natal has got around them but I haven't seen anything that promising from natal this far. 



correct me if I am wrong
stop me if I am bias
I love a good civilised debate (but only if we can learn something).

 

slowmo on 23 May 2010
thismeintiel said:
slowmo said:
thismeintiel said:

This whole argument over the tech is pretty dumb.  Especially, if the end result is the same thing.  Just like the Wiimote and Move, it will give you the same end result, albiet Move is more accurate.  Natal will give us the same end result as the PSEye.  Though, I have concerns it won't be as accurate.  And that is definitely not based on some Sony bias, but on every single vid and demo we have seen thus far.  And the fact that most, if not all, those vids are from before the processor was removed doesn't help dispell those concerns. 

@ iron man

You really shouldn't get yourself so hyped up for Natal.  You may be setting yourself up for a huge letdown.  Epsecially, if MS doesn't fix the accuracy issues, and if all the games turn out to be casual titles that are only fun for 20 mins.  Besides, MS didn't invent Ricochet.  Starts at 0:35

 

 

Actually the argument is very valid, you're only saying it's dumb because the specific details of the technology show just how flawed the statement PS Eye can do what Natal can do is.  The resource cost it would take on processing time to do a full body 3D skeletal capture on a person with the PS Eye would be ridiculous.  The camera isn't capable of doing what Natal does in that regard and it certainly couldn't do it at 30FPS with as comparatively little latency as Natal. 

You have ZERO evidence of the release version of Natal to be so negative with regards to accuracy, latency or indeed its software catalogue.  You really should start being more gracious about Natal's tech because you're the one who could actually end up with egg on your face too.  Natal isn't hyped on these boards, just irrationally hated upon by the way.

The point is, they both do motion capture differently.  PS Eye doesn't need to do a full skeletal capture to achieve it's motion capture.  Its method also allows it to have a refresh rate of either 60 FPS or 120FPS.  Natal can do a skeletal capture.  But, in the end, it doesn't matter how Natal does motion capture, if it's not accurate. 

And you're right, I have no proof that the final version will be like it has been in videos.  That's why I'm not doing the fanboy thing and saying, "Natal sucks!" or "Natal will be crap!"  I'm just looking at it with a skeptic's eye.  The vids I have seen have had tracking issues and they were from before the internal processor was taken out.  Now, the 360 has to do all the calculations, which is said to take 15% of it's processing power.  I just don't have much faith in the product.  Of course, there is still a chance MS can pull it off.

Also, on the flip side, these guys don't have proof that Natal will be incredibly accurate or offer tons of new gaming experiences.  Yet, that doesn't stop them from hyping this thing like the second coming of Christ.  You saying it isn't hyped kinda shows your bias.  Plus, I'm just saying it COULD lead to an ultimate letdown.

Thats fair enough but people act on here like there can be no positive hyping of Natal which is madness.  For every thing we see that could be bad or get worse, the flip side is it can get better before release.  I agree we shouldn't hype Natal as a second coming but by the same token I'm not going to stand by and watch people irrationally hate on it for no reason either, which I personally think is both a sensible and fair opinion.



Smidlee on 23 May 2010
ironman said:
joeorc said:
ironman said:
joeorc said:
ironman said:
joeorc said:
ironman said:
joeorc said:
Mr Puggsly said:
With the Eyetoy, could a 3D model be controlled by tracking your body or does it just sense where limbs are flailing? Also, can the Eyetoy see multiple people?

I've only seen a few Eyetoy games and most of them involve seeing your self smacking crap or making gestures. Is that all the Eyetoy was capable of?

The Eyetoy seems like a very limited device in comparison.

for instance:

it does track your hand's motion because the controller is the reference point in a 3D space.

because it know's where the Move controller is, it know by reference where your hand is.

so if your hand move's forward or back or in any direction the camera track's the position of the remote and can trach your hand's movement.

like i stated it's not 3d tracking by sight but by the reference point of the controller in 3d space.

yes the eyetoy can see multiple people in 2D but in order to track in a 3D space it need's an object that would be it's reference point/ A lighted sphere work's best because the focus point of the lighted sphere. even the Wii motion tracking track's in a 3D space.

 

 

 

That's a software perception of a Z-plane and not a true Z plane. The camera is only capable of 2D tracking, it cannot physically see in 3D.

i am not saying it can see in 3D i am not saying that...I am saying it can track and object in 3d space, that by no mean's excludes the camera from tracking an object in 3D. just because it cannot see it does not mean it cannot track it!

No, the camera cannot track it. the software does, you just admitted that. 

the software is programed for the camera to see an object right?

so if the camera is using the object as a reference point in space does it matter itf it seen the space? around the object to track it?

no because it's tracking the object and it's point in a space distance in A 3D AREA OF space what is in that space does not matter only the object it is tracking. this by math it know's the distance and where that object is inside an say a CUBE or sphere.

just because it's not viewing the area around the object it's tracking does not mean it's not tracking it in a 3D SPACE.

 

The camera does not track the object in the Z plane, it merely sees it in 2D, the software takes the objects size an compares it to the known size of said object then calculates it's theoretical position on the Z plane thus emulating 3D

what does it matter if it can see the area around the object if it alway's count's the object is alway's refrenced in a 3D plane.

it does not have to see it to track it. by using it as a reference point in 3D space it track's it in 3D space.

am it does have a z axis.

 

It matters because it's not true 3D and is not as accurate as true 3D. Face it, there is NOTHING on todays console market that tracks in true 3D like Natal does. 

TrackIR has been for years able to track your head in 3D space so I don't know how you get that. Also I seriously doubt Natal will work like your eyes/brain works, that is take two images to make a 3D enviroment. From what I've read in science jounrals even a supercomputer would have trouble doing it as well and fast as your eyes/brain does. More likely IR is used in one camera to help 3d depth while the other uses normal light for stuff like face recognition.

 In another words for my understanding it will take some serious CPU power to create a 3D world from two images which would no doubt produced serious lag. No doubt Natal will take some short cuts as it aready been reported is does some guessing in your exact position.



dahuman on 23 May 2010

Natal tracks "points" with the IR camera, that is the only real difference. It has a standard 2D camera and a IR camera that work together, it doesn't track in true 3D or anything, it just tracks a lot of points in the camera space with monochrome feedback sensing the distance of those points, much like how motion capture works, but on a flat surface since it's just one camera. It would be a nice cheap solution for capturing studios to employ Natals instead of full body suits with balls and a ton of cameras on the side though.