Quote: Original post by Metallon
I laughed a little at the notion that something like Kinect would be the base of new technology used in other fields. I'm quite ignorant when it comes to the development and progress of modern technology, but it seems obvious even to me that the technology used by Kinect has existed for at least five years and performs far better today (for what it's intended to do).

Since Kinect is a mass market product, its technology may be new to that market, but relative to modern technology I'd guess it's both behind and inferior.

The amazing thing about Kinect isn't what it does. You are correct that there are better products out there.

The amazing part is the price and the mass-adoption. They were taking a big risk that it wouldn't sell.

Developing such a complex device can be very expensive, and mass producing them is costly. They'll likely need to get into the high tens-of-millions of units before fully recovering their R&D costs. Fortunately for them, it looks like it will make it.

Quote: Original post by frob

Quote: Original post by Metallon
I laughed a little at the notion that something like Kinect would be the base of new technology used in other fields. I'm quite ignorant when it comes to the development and progress of modern technology, but it seems obvious even to me that the technology used by Kinect has existed for at least five years and performs far better today (for what it's intended to do).

Since Kinect is a mass market product, its technology may be new to that market, but relative to modern technology I'd guess it's both behind and inferior.

The amazing thing about Kinect isn't what it does. You are correct that there are better products out there.

The amazing part is the price and the mass-adoption. They were taking a big risk that it wouldn't sell.

Developing such a complex device can be very expensive, and mass producing them is costly. They'll likely need to get into the high tens-of-millions of units before fully recovering their R&D costs. Fortunately for them, it looks like it will make it.

Oh, of course. It's actually very impressive that such technology is so affordable. I was just pointing out that in relevant fields where this technology could be further developed to "completely change the way we live our life[sic]", their technology will most likely be more up-to-date. As a result, these people will likely not need Kinect.

But I can understand bright and talented individuals who work on these things for a hobby and who would like to get more hands-on with the Kinect and work on it.

Quote: Original post by Metallon
Oh, of course. It's actually very impressive that such technology is so affordable. I was just pointing out that in relevant fields where this technology could be further developed to "completely change the way we live our life[sic]", their technology will most likely be more up-to-date. As a result, these people will likely not need Kinect.

But I can understand bright and talented individuals who work on these things for a hobby and who would like to get more hands-on with the Kinect and work on it.

One cool effect might turn out to be that because of kinect's similar capabilities it could end up driving the prices of the more sophisticated stuff way way down. Of course I haven't seen a lot of stuff on how well kinect's tech would work if you cranked up the spending to be similar to these other technologies. It's very possible that it could end up performing comparably with benefits in some areas and detriments in others.

What are these other technologies everyone is talking about? I don't know of any other technologies that can get depth of pixels?

Quote: Original post by SteveDeFacto
What are these other technologies everyone is talking about? I don't know of any other technologies that can get depth of pixels?

LIDAR and RADAR. There's a couple other ones, but those are the two most obvious that come to mind quickly.

Quote: Original post by way2lazy2care

Quote: Original post by SteveDeFacto
What are these other technologies everyone is talking about? I don't know of any other technologies that can get depth of pixels?

LIDAR and RADAR. There's a couple other ones, but those are the two most obvious that come to mind quickly.

I thought the Kinect was using LIDAR and RADAR could never be used to return a clear image.

to go back to kinect, this eyar i plan to buy the software from ipisoft.

and they are looking into kinect.



that is the cheapest way to get mocap into my game/machinima/animation.

awesome.

Quote: Original post by SteveDeFacto
I thought the Kinect was using LIDAR and RADAR could never be used to return a clear image.

Kinect as far as I know is just an infrared camera.

Quote: Original post by FableFox
to go back to kinect, this eyar i plan to buy the software from ipisoft.

and they are looking into kinect.

that is the cheapest way to get mocap into my game/machinima/animation.

awesome.

Actually not really. The software costs $600- $1000. I'm using mixamo.com for my game's animations.

Quote: Original post by SteveDeFacto
What are these other technologies everyone is talking about? I don't know of any other technologies that can get depth of pixels?

It's old technology, and it is already in use everywhere so you don't notice.

Also note that there are two parts. The first (harder) part is constructing a model. The second (easier) part for the Kinect is smearing the webcam image over the surface to produce a color.

The basic theory to construct the model is called back projection. It a part of the field of image reconstruction. For images, you'd use stereo images to reconstruct it by projecting the image back into an approximated model. There are many thousands of research papers on the subject dating back almost a century, long before 3D graphics were practical.

You know those little gray ultrasound images that expectant parents have shown off since the 1960s? That is a depth image.

The little baby ultrasound doesn't provide a pretty webcam texture for the model, but the depth information is far better than the Kinect can offer. The devices are even relatively cheap costing a few thousand dollars. You can pick up a used scanner on Ebay for a few hundred bucks.


Many types of medical scanners use the techniques to reconstruct your body internals with extreme accuracy and precision. Satellites use it to build topographical maps and measure the distance of space dust. The various Lunar landers and Martian landers sent information back for that kind of processing. Statues and other pieces of art are routinely scanned and studied. Even dinosaur hunters use it, as seen in the movie Jurassic Park. [grin]

More generally visible, the same technology is used to scan and model storm clouds and track rainfall globally. Civil engineers have used it for decades to model underground topology and identify places to drill water, oil, and gas wells.


I recall some papers from about a decade ago (2001?) where a single uncalibrated handheld video camera [translation: a cheap camcorder] could reconstruct highly accurate depth models based on a recorded movie and hand movement. It didn't need any measurements of camera motion, nor did it need other specialized equipment. The process was fairly quick but still something that took a bit of time to reconstruct the world.


It is a technology that is widely used in modern society, albiet with more expensive and specialized machines. You just need to recognize what to look for and you can find it everywhere.