Hi,
I can only comment on your first question. We have ELMO's equivalent of the
toshiba (which is also very expensive). The problem using the toshiba is that it
has no progressive scanning mode it can only do 2:1 interlaced, which is a
drawback for computer vision applications if you have objects moving relative to
the camera.
I don't know about a colour micro head which is doing progressive scanning. JAI
has some micro heads as well and I think they are a bit cheaper, they also have
RGB output which will improve the colour signal.
http://www.jai.com
http://www.jai.com/db_datasheet/cvm2000.pdf
Or you can try pointgray. They have a firewire progressive scanning camera
module (all sony laptops have an interface) which is a bit bigger but I think
for AR glasses still ok:
http://www.ptgrey.com/products/firefly/index.htm
/Moritz
Adrian David Cheok wrote:
> Dear All
>
> I also have some questions pertaining to hardware for video-see through
> augmented reality:
>
> (1) I have noticed many research groups using the TOSHIBA IK-M43 cameras
> (and we plan to order them also!). It seems that they offer a small size and
> good quality - but are very expensive. However, are these the ideal cameras
> to use for augmented reality applications, and why? Is there a really
> noticeable difference between these cameras and the much cheaper CMOS
> cameras that are avaliable.
>
> (2) We also want to use augmented reality for wearable computers. We were
> planning to use a PC Card (PCMIA) frame grabber - the VIDEOPORT PRO. However
> it has recently been discontinued we were told. Is there any other PC Card
> solution for frame grabbing out there (I have done a big but hopeless
> search).
>
> (3) Has anyone used the everyday USB WEB cams for mixed reality. I feel that
> the resolution and frame rate will be too low over the 12MB/s USB bus, but
> has anyone found a good USB WEB Cam that might be suitable?
>
> (4) Has anyone used USB based frame grabbers, I guess the resolution and
> frame rate might be poor for augmented reality apps.
>
> Thank you very much for your time to read this
>
> Adrian
>
> \begin
> <Dr Adrian David Cheok>
> <adriancheok@n .........>
> <Dept. Electrical and Computer Engineering>
> <National University of Singapore>
> <Singapore 117576>
> <PH +65 874 6850>
> <FAX +65 779 1103>
> \end
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-artoolkit@h ..................
> [mailto:owner-artoolkit@h ..................]On Behalf Of Robert Hinn
> Sent: Thursday, 31 May 2001 8:30 PM
> To: Dan Novy
> Cc: art
> Subject: Re: Suggested Hardware List
>
> Hi.
>
> Right, we are using an IBM-PC system with a hauppauge WinTV, too.
> You can get decent 3d acceleration with a GeForce 2 MX card, if
> you don't want to spend too much money...
> And we are using RedHat Linux, you can download the CD-images
> from the RedHat ftp server for free.
>
> We get about 20 frames per second with 640x480 resolution with
> moderately complex 3D objects.
>
> Bye,
> Robert.
>
> Mark Billinghurst schrieb:
> >
> > Hi Dan,
> >
> > Most of the AR systems we have at the HIT Lab are based on Linux. We find
> > that we can get better video capture performance out of the Video 4 Linux
> > API than the Video For Windows API.
> >
> > We mostly just used cheap bt848 ot b78 based video capture cards. For
> > example the Hauppauge WinTV card. With a Penitum 1.3 GHz or similar we can
> > capture and process 640x480 video images at 30 frames per second.
> >
> > Nvidia has also provided linux drivers for all it's graphics chips, so you
> > can load Linux on a system with a GeForce2 GTS or GeForce Ultra2 card and
> > get great graphics performance.
> >
> > Of course it depends how much money you want to throw at it. Most of our
> > Linux systems cost $1500 or less. If you are willing to spend much more
> > then you can get amazing results.
> >
> > Hope this helps..
> >
> > Mark
> >
> >
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> +++
> > Mark Billinghurst | Human Interface Technology Laboratory
> > grof@h .................. | University of Washington, Box 352-142
> > fax: +1-206-543-5380 | Seattle, WA 98195
> > On Wed, 30 May 2001, Dan Novy wrote:
> >
> > > Hi, Everyone! I was wondering, if one were to build an optimal
> > > "dream" AR system from scratch, what would one use? Has an
> > > approved/optimal hardware list been complied. I'm leaning toward LINUX,
> > > but am having trouble determining which frame grabber card is best. I
> > > also have access to some OCtanes (IRIX 6.5) and an SGI 320. Any
> > > opinions?
> > >
> > > Dan Novy
> > > Technical Supervisor
> > > Flash Film Works
> > >
> > >
--
Moritz Stoerring Phone: +45 96 35 87 83
Computer Vision and Media Fax: +45 98 15 24 44
Technology Laboratory
Institute of Electronic Systems WWW: http://www.ima.auc.dk/~mst
Aalborg University Email: mst@c ..........
Niels Jernes Vej 14 bldg. 3-111
DK-9220 Aalborg East Home: +45 28122650
Denmark
|
