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

Forums - Gaming - Why camera based motion control is problematic

Daffy on 14 November 2009
Avarice28 said:
Porcupine_I said:
Smidlee said:
I have had sunlight screw up the wii-mote as well before. So yes Sunlight has an effect on camera as well bad glare on TV screens.

Sunlight interferes with the Wii's Infrared, just as it can affect any other infrared remote control.

 

i believe natal works with infrared technology too, i wonder if that could become a subject in the future as well.

So Natal is "based" upon IR tech, did not know that.  Either way movement can be miss read with just a varying difference in light sources.

In fact Natal works with hybrid technology where IR and normal camera based motion tracking is processed with Natals CPU to "skeleton" with several tracking points. Heavy IR source like studio lamps or direct sun light would cause problems for more precise IR camera, but normal camera would still work.



Around the Network
Dr.Grass on 14 November 2009

Who the hell plays videogames in streaming sunlight!!??



Smidlee on 14 November 2009

Sunlight does enter into everyday normal homes. Sunlight bouncing off of walls can be pick up on cameras with IR lens. For example, I had trouble with the wii-mote when using the IR camera. It took me a little while to realize it was cause by sunlight shining on a wall in the kitchen some distance away. I've even had some trouble  with TrackIR when some sunlight hit the wall behind me.  That's with the blinds close yet the sunlight still shine though the edges.



theprof00 on 14 November 2009
Porcupine_I said:
theprof00 said:
the mistake you made with the title was saying motion control.
To any member here, that would be referring to the sony wandballs or whatever you want to call them.
This should be titled, "why the pseye is problematic".
Whereas everyone would come in here and say "thanks genius"

..actually i thought this was about natal, as it said "camera based motion control"

 

:D

they're two completely different technologies.



Porcupine_I on 14 November 2009
theprof00 said:
Porcupine_I said:
theprof00 said:
the mistake you made with the title was saying motion control.
To any member here, that would be referring to the sony wandballs or whatever you want to call them.
This should be titled, "why the pseye is problematic".
Whereas everyone would come in here and say "thanks genius"

..actually i thought this was about natal, as it said "camera based motion control"

 

:D

they're two completely different technologies.

i know they are different technologies, but that is irrelevant, natal is still a "camera based motion control"

 

but you said the title was misleading, and everyone would think it is about sonys wand

 

and  tried to state that the term "camera based motion control" for me refers to natal rather then sonys wand.

 



“It appeared that there had even been demonstrations to thank Big Brother for raising the chocolate ration to twenty grams a week. And only yesterday, he reflected, it had been announced that the ration was to be reduced to twenty grams a week. Was it possible that they could swallow that, after only twenty-four hours? Yes, they swallowed it.”

- George Orwell, ‘1984’

Around the Network
theprof00 on 14 November 2009
Porcupine_I said:
theprof00 said:
Porcupine_I said:
theprof00 said:
the mistake you made with the title was saying motion control.
To any member here, that would be referring to the sony wandballs or whatever you want to call them.
This should be titled, "why the pseye is problematic".
Whereas everyone would come in here and say "thanks genius"

..actually i thought this was about natal, as it said "camera based motion control"

 

:D

they're two completely different technologies.

i know they are different technologies, but that is irrelevant, natal is still a "camera based motion control"

 

but you said the title was misleading, and everyone would think it is about sonys wand

 

and  tried to state that the term "camera based motion control" for me refers to natal rather then sonys wand.

 

I do very much agree that it sounds like Natal more than sony torch. To me, because of the nature of the torch being so different than camera based control, it has to mean Natal. Trying to compare Eyepet to the wand is just plain silly.

I'm sure you understand how Natal works, so I won't belabor the point, but Natal uses IR and PSEye is a camera. While similar, one works on IR spectrum of light, and one works on visible light.

Either way the article and the OP have a very forward-thinking approach to this game. It's plainly obvious that the pseye has problems. It's been that way since the beginning, and is exactly why it hasn't been the must-have device that it could be. Instead, the article has the idea that this tech "isn't ready to move past 'tech-demo'". This phrase, along with others, is an interesting choice of words that implies that the failure of eyepet is the failure of sony torch/natal.

So, while the title and OP are correct in saying that this is a failure of motion based camera, it is not a failure of sony/ms new motion control technologies coming out in 2010.