Re: Relative Positioning
- From: John Nagle <nagle@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 08 May 2008 09:26:05 -0700
Gordon McComb wrote:
mattrapoport@xxxxxxxxx wrote:Thank you for the thoughtful responses. I've looked into the
solutions mentioned and unfortunately I don't believe they will suit
my purpose. I realize now how important it was for me to stress the
required accuracy. It should be accurate to the millimeter or better
if possible. It also must be entirely self contained. No cameras.
Onboard processor.
That's a great project. Those are better specs than the motion
capture industry can currently achieve. Do you have venture capital?
This is not impossible, but it's not cheap or something that can
be done with off the shelf technology. The magnetic motion capture
systems have trouble getting better than 2cm accuracy. The multiple
camera video systems do a bit better, but you have to be within
the camera space and there are still occlusion problems.
I could see something with GPS, pseudolites, phase angle
measurement, local Bluetooth links, accelerometers, and an
IK system for cleanup. Nice project. Five people, two years,
about $5M, I think.
An interesting option would be to use cameras looking outward
strapped to the user's joints. During recording, just record
all the video. In postprocessing, use SLAM to extract positional
data. Then it's mostly a software problem. If you're in some
environment with lots of texture the SLAM matching can latch onto,
this could work.
John Nagle
Animats
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Relative Positioning
- From: mattrapoport
- Re: Relative Positioning
- References:
- Relative Positioning
- From: mattrapoport
- Re: Relative Positioning
- From: mattrapoport
- Re: Relative Positioning
- From: Gordon McComb
- Relative Positioning
- Prev by Date: Re: Relative Positioning
- Next by Date: Re: Relative Positioning
- Previous by thread: Re: Relative Positioning
- Next by thread: Re: Relative Positioning
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|