EDtracker vs Delanclip ?
-
Hi,
I would also go for the EDTracker, as I’m not a huge fan of an extra camera in pit
I use it now for 3 years and I’m still happy with it.
Thanks and have a great evening,
Tweety -
I’m wondering about the “DelanClip == NoZoom” bit… it’s entirely up to the software you use. Of course you can use this clip for z-zoom (as you can any other).
The delanclip works great on windows using FaceTrackNoIR and linuxtrack / opentrack on Linux. I’d also be a bit doubtful about claims like “TrackIR being the most precise” because naturally that’s bound to be influenced by the “sunk cost fallacy” (I spent so much much money on it so it must be the best) as anything, unless you’ve tried all of the options referenced here in the thread personally.
For about $10 in parts you can build your own clip or ask a friend to help you if you don’t know which end of the soldering iron gets hot (like in my case :)), get a used ps/eye cam and you’ll be all set for around $30 in parts which is not a bad deal in order to dip your toes into head tracking (and you’ll be hooked from the moment you’ll get it to work even half-satisfactorily :))
All the best, Uwe
The no zoom thing is for the EDTracker that has only 3DOF
-
Ah ok, thanks for clearing that up.
Uwe
-
Yeah - that’s the zoom I’m referring to; but even zoom when just “moving one’s head around” isn’t really all that “relisimo” and I find I can do without zoom altogether. Being able to look around is far more important than being able to “magnify”, IMO. MMV.
Lol - just wait till you get to my age and your eyes start to go (despite your glasses, and HD monitor of fair size and high DPI, hi-res graphics, etc.) – damn numbers on the gauges can’t be detailed enough to make out without getting the face a bit closer to the instrument panel sometimes. 6DOF FTW in that case!
And that zoom you’re talking about, the cheating kind - that’s not 6DOF head tracking, that’s binding the “wrong” zoom to the head and would be rather jarring to the eyes if you’re gently moving around the cockpit with your head looking at instruments, and the outside is coming in and going out with every movement. I’d get sick… :sick:
-
… I’d also be a bit doubtful about claims like “TrackIR being the most precise” because naturally that’s bound to be influenced by the “sunk cost fallacy” (I spent so much much money on it so it must be the best) as anything, unless you’ve tried all of the options referenced here in the thread personally.
I’d be doubtful, too, because people spout all sorts of nonsense online. Rest assured that I am not trying to talk out of my … w/e. All due respect, when I said that the TrackIR was a bit expensive, but the most precise, it was stating a fact as I knew it, and facts are not open to interpretation, though I can see how my statement (without any supporting evidence) comes across like an argument for a flat earth. I did not intend any smug shilling statement by what I said.
The TrackIR is the most precise head tracking product available for purchase (and that’s a fairly confident AFAIK, FTR) because it can focus on 1/150th of a pixel - which is pretty impressive. Couple that with an extremely refined GUI, and the higher cost of this unit becomes more understandable, and farther from phallic justifications. It was so long ago that I purchased my TrackIR that I doubt the cost justification argument still applies to me, but going out on a limb here, I’ll say that I have had and used other tracking solutions when experimenting with VR and non-native-VR games, as well as at times when my TrackIR was in disrepair or simply mothballed for whatever reason. One of the things I dislike is the wired TrackClip Pro, but I’m working on a DIY wireless kit for it.
I’m no shill for TrackIR, but I stand behind my statement that it’s a good bit of gear, sleek design, injection molding craftsmanship on the TrackClip, and excellent modern software GUI. I also like OpenTrack, too. But TrackIR is more precise.
As a final note, no one needs to try all of the options in order to form an opinion, or to state facts. People can assume what an opinion is based on, or they can ask. In my case, it’s based on user experience and facts. I’ve not tried them all, but I’ve tried some and I’ve educated myself on the workings of many. If any of these other tracking solutions have the technological precision able to focus on 1/150th of a pixel, I would be happy to stand corrected. Hell, I’ve been around here for like seven years and just recently learned that the dev team here does not have group titles next to their names, (moderators do, but…) but use the same “member/senior member/etc” titles as everyone on the website, and I got a taste of my own foot when I assumed otherwise.
It’s a fairly confident AFAIK, that TrackIR is the most precise tracking product for sale, based on known facts. Happy to learn otherwise, though. Totally not needed to purchase the most expensive and most precise head tracker for gaming, and there are many wonderful and affordable options. Back when I purchased my TrackIR, there were two options and one of them was easily thrown off by the glare off my glasses, while all of that went away when switching to TiR with TrackClip Pro.
All the best to you, Uwe!
-
I’ve used both.
EDTracker pro works ok enough for me. My EDtracker pro is from a few years back. Some of my friends have bought it not so long ago, and they’ve had some issues with theirs. I don’t know if it’s because of changes in EDtracker software or something else, such as the surroundings they use it in. I have a car seat in my pit, and I noticed that EDtracker took interference from the metal that was in the headrest, so I had to remove it. I fly WW2 too, where the visibility to my six is sometimes very limited, so I’ve been using the “pseudo 6DOF” (mapping head roll to X axis). It takes a bit of getting used to compared to using Delanclip, that is 6DOF.
I previously had a modded Microsoft VX-1000 webcam, and with that the tracking was not so good. That’s actually the reason why I decided to try EDtracker. A few months ago I started using a modded PS Eye camera, and since had no more issues with tracking. Currently, Delanclip is my 1st option, and I keep EDtracker as a backup for situations where there are interfering light sources behind my back.
I use OpenTrack with both EDtracker and Delanclip.
-
If you use 2 sensors, then the inertial tracker can work along 5 axes.
-
+1
You can get zoom by adding a piece of software called FaceTrack No IR. It is tracker software that track both a primary and secondary input source. You can use EDTracker as the primary source and then use the built in face tracking via webcam in this software to track the Z-axis. Problem solved!
-
You can get zoom by adding a piece of software called FaceTrack No IR. It is tracker software that track both a primary and secondary input source. You can use EDTracker as the primary source and then use the built in face tracking via webcam in this software to track the Z-axis. Problem solved!
Can you please elaborate a bit more? Seems interesting…
-
Can you please elaborate a bit more? Seems interesting…
FaceTrackNoIR can be found here: http://www.facetracknoir.nl/
This tracker program has built-in support for many of the most popular types of head tracking solutions. The main tracking solution that it uniquely offers is face tracking via a standard webcam. This capability is the main reason this head tracking software exists. While not flawless, the face tracking does a pretty reasonable job of 6 DOF head tracking by identifying the positions of your eyes, nose, and mouth relative to each other via webcam. The most problematic tracking is for left/right head twist movements equating to yaw and less so with up/down movements equating to pitch. Obviously, at some point in the yaw and pitch axis near the extremes of the x and y movement the webcam will lose tracking on some of your facial features. But the zoom on the z-axis and translation movements in the x, y axes are not affected as foward/back movement and right/left up/down translation movments of the head keeps all the facial tracking features fully in view of the webcam. You can get around these limitations by modifying the sensitivity of the response curves on the x,y axes for yaw and pitch by limiting the range of head movement in order to keep your face in view of the webcam. This works reasonably well although it restricts somewhat the range of head movement in the x, y axes.
FaceTrackNoIR provides an alternative solution to this issue by including dual tracking inputs. So I normally set up EDTracker as the primary tracker by emulating x, y axis joystick inputs for yaw and pitch. I use the built-in face tracker as a secondary input for the z-axis and x,y translation movements. This solution works perfectly and allows you to cheaply get a near perfect approximation of a more expensive 6 DOF TrackIR solution in terms of range of movement and overall performance. I say near perfect because while TrackIR may be used in a darkened room, you will require a well lit room for the webcam tracking to work. But other than that it is a very good solution.
Alternatively you can use this pseudo 6 DOF solution provided by one of the EDTracker engineers:
. Essentially what this does is partially map the z-axis forward/back and x, y translation movments to the x, y yaw and pitch axes such that as you start to look down your virtual head gradually leans forward. Of course, this solution only works well with sims where you have simpler cockpit instrumentation and you only need to lean-in to the cockpit to get a closer view. However, this is really not usable in the case of BMS or DCS where you need full 6 DOF to focus in on specific areas of the cockpit instrumentation and interact with them.