4 ms·
I'd like to hear you expand on that, perhaps we don't align on the definition of elegant? I think the Lighthouse system is elegant specifically because it doesn
by errantspark 10y ago
I'd like to hear you expand on that, perhaps we don't align on the definition of elegant? I think the Lighthouse system is elegant specifically because it doesn't use cameras at all. That's what makes it so cool is that it's not limited by sensor resolution, to get really accurate tracking using cameras you need to crunch a LOT of data really quickly. I wouldn't be surprised if it's order's of magnitude less computationally expensive, especially since IIRC in the Lighthouse system most of the heavy lifting is done using an FPGA.
I think the system mentioned by jc4p is similarly elegant but for different reasons. Based on a skim through the article he posted I'd say the Lighthouse system is likely cheaper, and can more easily track multiple (infinite really since the tracking is done on the object rather than using the base station) objects, but won't have the same sort of range as MTS. Both are loads better than using cameras IMO.
- hbosch 10y ago> I think the Lighthouse system is elegant specifically because it doesn't use cameras at all. Not to be purposefully pedantic, so please excuse me, but aren't the small "dimples" on the Vive hardware technically very simple, low-res infrared cameras that are designed to pick up the Lighthouse lasers?
- badsock 10y agoThey're just simple IR sensors - they can detect when IR is shining on them, but not from which direction. Put another way: each one is the equivalent of a single pixel in a camera sensor. Position is determined by watching the timing very closely of when each sensor detects the IR sweep, and then doing the math given those timings and the known orientation of the sensors relative to each other.
- X-Cubed 10y agoThey're photodiodes, so each one is only capturing a single luminance value, they're not capturing an image.