Head Tracking with Cliffs of Dover
 

EDIT****If you want info about the questions I asked dont read this thread because it is full of useless off-topic posts mostly by two sad fellas.

Having already ordered a HOTAS+Rudder pedals for this sim(thanks to all the kind members for sharing your thoughts and experience on my other thread),now its time for me to consider upgrading my head tracking setup.I've been using Freetrack for the past year with almost no complaints regarding the software.On the other hand, due to my poor craftsmanship, my 3 point clip started failing on me,something I was expecting because that thing was held on by layers and layers of duct tape(yes it was a pretty cheap build).So I've read several times that I could use the Natural Point Track Clip Pro with Freetrack, and went to their website to order one.I can get it shipped for $60.00.If I would have know these from the start I would have saved the money I spent on the webcam+ tools and parts and go all out for a TrackIR solution.My main concern is,how can I be sure that Freetrack is going to be supported when the game comes out?If I could choose I would stay with freetrack because its a great piece of software,and the fact that it is free.Though there are a few advantages to owning Track Ir.The most important for me is the reflective Clip.Having the 3 point clip with Freetrack means that I need to have my headphones on in addition to another cable hanging around my face.I guess I could build a reflective clip for Freetrack but I honestly dont want to fiddle more with parts.



Freetrack
Pros:
-FREE software
-Easy to set up and use once you got the setup built correctly
-Easy to replace(if the camera fails)

Cons:
-Support(not all games supporting track ir support freetrack, correct me)
-Bothersome to make clip(at least to me)
-Requires a dark room to work properly most of the time

TrackIR
Pros:
-No need to build
-More complex software(im assuming)
-Comes with reflective clip(does not need a dark room to work properly)
-Better support on games

Cons:
-Expensive!

I guess there are more cons but since I dont own a TIR setup I dont know which ones.

If I decided to go for the TrackIR I would try to get the TIR4 but it isnt available on amazon and theres just a few on ebay.Where is the cheapest place I could get one?Feel free to correct my mistakes, if there's any.Give me some advice/suggestions/experience.And most importantly,is Freetrack going to be supported at release?Im fairly new to the forum so maybe this was discussed earlier.

Would be good to know the position of OM. Have they blocked access to needed information as Eagle Dynamics did with DCS:Black Shark(because Natural Point payed it)?

Well, Ilya has been shown using TrackIR in 2 videos.In one of them he was actually talking about it.

Instead of making a setup that tracks three infrared lights, just mount a few to shine towards you (high output LED's if possible) and just make your own reflective clip instead. That way you don't have to have a bunch of wires hanging from your head, and the LED setup could run off of a power source other than batteries. (think replacing one of those USB LED lamps with an IR one).

Could be, never found one that doesn't support Freetrack though (Black Shark needs a fix though).

You can buy the TrackClipPro (yes, pretty expensive, but still less expensive then TrackIR). This might be a problem if you don't wear a headphone/headset.

Not if you use IR LED's (or bought the TrackClipPro).

I'm using Freetrack with a VX3000 webcam and the TrackclipPro and it works perfectly, no reason for me to get TrackIR.


If CloD won't support Freetrack, i'll be very disappointed.

Thanks for your replies.Indeed a lot of people will be dissapointed if there's no Freetrack support.That is why I havent bought anything yet.

does FT still hack from TIR software?

No Im not using IR led's though I thought they were when I bought them.How's the build quality?I read somewhere that it broke fairly easy.

It seems very fragile indeed. I have it for 15 months or so and it's still in good shape, it won't fall apart by looking at it, but it's definately not sturdy, especially not for the price, if it would cost 10 € or so, it would be a fair price imo.

I had some problems with power outages and surges recently that resulted in my power supply getting fried. Thankfully, the rest of my PC survived and the PSU was replaced for free thanks to a 3-year warranty, but the whole thing ended with my TrackIR 4 camera going dead.

I was of course considerably annoyed (to put it mildly :-P ) because i didn't want to buy a new set, but on the other hand head tracking is one of those things that once you get used to you can't go back.

So i installed freetrack and after some tweaking i can use it with a cheap microsoft lifecam vx-5000 and my battered trackclip Pro (that thing is so notoriously flimsy that i've had to use duct-tape a mere 2 months after i bought my TrackIR+trackclip Pro set).

I use my webcam to place skype videocalls to relatives abroad, so i change the camera's configuration back and forth whenever i want to use freetrack.

Also for the same reason i haven't modified it (didn't remove the IR filter), but the IR leds from the trackcklip still register if the room is dark.

Granted, my initial observations are a bit tinted by the fact that i haven't tweaked freetrack to my taste just yet, but truth be told if i could spare the money right now i'd buy a new TrackIR set.

Don't get me wrong, Freetrack is a very good solution and i hope it's supported in CoD. However, coming from 2-3 years of TrackIR use it seems to me that TrackIR is definitely better (or just something i'm used to).

My comparison will focus mainly on the things that i think trackIR does better, not because i want to diss freetrack but because if it was equally good i'd be just saying "omg, it's as good as trackIR and free, definitely prefer it!" and be done with it :-P

For me, the points i personally disliked were:
1) There's a noticeable delay between moving my head and freetrack doing its job. I guess this is not an issue for someone who's new to head tracking or only used freetrack in the past, but for someone who's used TrackIR and got spoiled by its near instantaneous response the delay is noticeable.

2) The freetrack software is definitely more complicated than TrackIR version 5 software, but it's more or less on par with the older trackIR version 4 versions. I guess that's the price one pays for the ability to customize, more parameters and so on.

3) The keys i use to control freetrack sometimes have trouble registering. I use F9 to pause it and F12 to recenter. Sometimes i have to keep pressing 2-4 times before it does what it's supposed to do. The biggest drawback in this is that if you pause it, it seems to also deactivate the camera so when you resume it you have to wait for the webcam to also do its own "start-up". It's not a century of delay of course, but it's a noticeable and often crucial few seconds.
With trackIR, i could point my head into a weird angle, pause the device at that spot and turn my head straight on the screen to keep looking that way without straining my neck, then i would press F9 again and it would instantly start following my movement again.
With freetrack, i find that it will probably take 2-3 attempts to do it and then i'll also have to wait a few seconds for the webcam to come back to life.

4) Trying to set a proper curve for one axis in Freetrack is driving me nuts. The trackIR method (especially in the version 5 software) is definitely superior by leaps and bounds.

5) Accuracy is not the same, even when using 640x480 webcam video resolution. I also have a steady 30FPS with 0 jitter and the freetrack software clearly shows 3 dots being tracked. I won't hold this last one against it however, because i think it could be improved with some tweaking on my part.
I get a lot of "blind" angles, so for example if i want to look to my 5 o'clock the movement is smooth until a certain point, i get a blind spot where it loses contact and then it picks it up again. I think this could be solved by making my own custom IR leds and sanding them down a bit so they are easier to pick up, plus taping some photo film in front of my webcam to act as a visible light filter.

6) I get motion in an extra axis during certain movements. If i'm looking straight up the in-game view also rotates to clockwise some, if i'm looking down into the cockpit it rotates counter-clockwise. TrackIR had a bit of this too in the version4 software but definitely not so pronounced and it was totally eradicated for me with the version 5 drivers.
I think this is also a point that can be solved with some tweaking, as i think it has to do with setting the distances of the reference point in the freetrack interface.


Finally, my thoughts on a few improvements that could make freetrack even better.

1) Don't turn off the webcam when pause key is pressed, leave it running, keep tracking it but just stop the data stream towards the game. This would solve the wasted seconds between pause and resume.

2) A revamped interface for setting up the sensitivity curves. Keep the old one for those that might prefer it, plus copy the trackIR method as an alternative way to do it.

3) Have a way to automatically calibrate the reference point so we don't have to take a measuring tape to our heads :-P
A 3-step calibration could be used, where the player needs to look straight ahead, all the way up and all the way down. The software could then extrapolate the reference point datum by measuring the rotational offset that's caused when looking up/down, because it knows it shouldn't be there.

My final assesment is that freetrack is not as good as trackIR in an absolute comparison, but it's better on a cost-effectiveness basis. If you want to get head tracking on the cheap definitely try it out, just be prepared to spend time configuring it and having to deal with a few frustrating aspects.

I've been running the Track Clip Pro emitter on my Sennheisers pretty much since they came out with the thing.

No issues.

And I will give up my TIR 4 Pro when they pry it from my cold, dead, hands.

Huh?
TIR cameras are locked out in the current FT software(by NP request), so no, I don't think they copy their software.

But I managed to find a FT version which you make work with a TIR cam, only needs an additional optitrack driver.
In my case that's a TIR3 cam, the results however are not so overwhelming.
Could be due to the fact that my LED construction's dimensions are not 100% identical to TIR specs?

Anyway, I just bought used TIR5 for $80, and hope it performs better.
I wonder what benefit over 100 fps will have .

So far, FT wins hands down.
- easier to use and to setup imho
- more software options for adjustments
- cheaper

When my 3 point clip worked I had no problems to speak of except the fact that I had to close the door and windows to make the room darker.

You can see how it performed in Wings of Prey in one of my videos.Please dont focus on my flying/shooting skills.
Here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xeKqaccTmRM
It looks kinda slow but I had all the smooth sliders to the max.

Swiss, as I understood it the FT hacks from the NP coding.

Not having the TIR camera available for use with the FT software is the other end of the stick and irrelevent.

Were did you find it that cheap?

If you look in Freetrack at the controls/tracking/center, you see a box for "toggle". You want this box unchecked. What is happening is you are pressing F12 too much/fast and the box gets 'auto" checked and unchecked by the software. The best way around this is to write and run yourself a Glovepie script similar to below. That way, you will always be consistent with the center key. Note the .2 second time delay. Also, most if not all of the problems you are experiencing with Freetrak can be resolved. There should be no hesitation...etc. It is possible to get it very stable and smooth to where the only thing you need to do is initiate the program and start the tracking. But it does take some time and initiative to get it figured it out. Count me on the list of users hoping that CoD will include ability to use Freetrak.

;*************************FREETRAK**************** ******************************
;in freetrak software, make sure f12 is mapped to "center" and f10 is mapped to "pause"
;center freetrak and mouse cursor
if joystick1.Button6 =true then
key.f12=true
mouse.CursorPosX=700
mouse.CursorPosY=525
elseif released(joystick1.Button6) then
wait .2 seconds
key.f12= false
endif

Edit:You can ignore the mouse cursor stuff. I have the mouse cursor visible in game. So this script centers the mouse cursor up for me when I press button 6 on the joystick. Also, I usually only have to press button 6 once after I have adjusted my seating position. Then it's good for the duration unless I alter my seating position. Then I have to press it again.

You understood nothing.

NP "coding" is nothing. The math behind tracking 3 points in space is free, old and simple.

Why NP sell overpriced hardware? Because people like to waste money in 2011 and don't have so much manual skill and are lazy, and use the oldest excuse "I don't have time and have plenty of money". Thank's God this kind of people don't move the world.

Why we don't see Freetrack support in all games with HT? Because NP uses pathetic commercial practices, and devs can't even answer simple questions - like IL-2:CoD devs - about Freetrack support.

I'm tired about all this kind of thing. A shame, ridiculous, etc. Of course IL-2:CoD will have TrackIR support, but why ANY of the devs can't write A LINE about Freetrack support? KGB?

Take it is my friend.I did have time to try and build my clip,I did it and it was falling apart,it worked but that doesnt mean it was a treat to use.For what I've paid for the webcam+tools I didnt have and the parts to build ,I could have saved a bit more and go for TIR,but I didnt.I wanted to try Freetrack and I found out it was an excellent piece of software.Dont be so eager to judge people like that.

was a used one(still cheap imho), local auction site.


That would be a copyright infringement.
If ft really did, their site would be down - and I also don't know of any lawsuits the filed and won.




Edit: Does anyone know if there's a vector clip for basecap mounting?

I have both FT and TrackIR but prefer FT, if set up correctly there should be no issues with FT in use and I find the software better allround (probably because I started with FT and then added NP TIR to my SIM hardware collection only recently). After setting it up and trying it for a week I went back to FT. The best recommendations I can give are that TrackIR is 'plug n play', 'guaranteed to work' and will definitely be supported in CoD.

From previous threads, the general opinion was that CoD would use NP's encrypted interface (compatible with TIR4/5 hardware only) which would exclude FT as a 'plug n play' alternative unless CoD also included FT's own bespoke interface. It may well be that to use FT you may have to use it in an alternative mode such as 'PPjoy', mouse emulation (2DOF) or something similar. I have never seen a response from the Dev's regards FT support.

Thanks for your reply SEE.

I think it worth mentioning possible safety issue here. It is not good for your eyes to look at infrared light source. If you do reflective setup, make sure the LED's are not infrared.

I guess it wouldnt work without ir led's.I think the Trackir camera uses ir led's that the reflective clip,well reflects.

Just a thought, WOP (which is only 12 months old) supports both TIR and FT so I guess it must use the older 'non encrypted interface'. May be CoD will be similar, we will have to wait and see. Without a definitive answer from the Dev's we are all pretty much guessing.

To clarify what I was thinking. In a reflective setup you would use reflective tape instead of LED's in your headset. The light source would be at the camera. That's the direction I thought SpecJock was going in his comment. So, you would not want to use infrared led under that design, because it would be pointed towards you instead of away from you, and you would get eye damage.

Normal IR LEDs are incapable of damaging your eyes, they do not emit the power or wavelength required to heat anything.

The average hand held video camera with "night-vision" has IR LEDs, with no safety concerns being raised.

"FT hacking" is irrelevant to the issue of games exposing or not exposing the head control axes, which is of far greater importance. This is especially true, as the claim of "hacking" only involves the formatting of a trivial string, for legal rather than functional purposes.

If NP wants to re-invent the wheel, and create it's own super-dooper-ultra-special method of getting six generic, run-of-the-mill axes into a game, then good for them. It's their (sometimes successful) attempts to get the game devs to hide the head control axes that are unacceptable, and anti-competitive.

no, I don't misunderstand, sport... NP have every right to protect their efforts... does FT have its own module that developers can put into their product, or does FT still rely on pulling information out of NP's module?

It's agressive defense like yours which kills your own argument ;)

Wow, almost all the threads here end up with a huge off topic discussion.Is it so hard to stay on topic?

Actually, FT has it's own interface and just collects and transmits positional data. In older games that only support trackIR but use an old unlocked version of the naturalpoint API, FT transmits that data through the naturalpoint interface.

It's similar for FS2004/FSX, where FT feeds its data to microsoft's simconnect interface.

As for the newer games that use a locked version of the NP API it's up to the developers to enable native FT support. An example of this is ArmA2.

So, long story short, FT is perfectly capable of interfacing directly and on its own with any game, as long as the game developers let it do so.



Are you sure about this? IR wavelengths carry less energy than our everyday normal, visible light. It should probably be completely harmless, as going out on a sunny day or simply driving at night and seeing the headlights of the cars on the opposite lane would bombard you with light radiation of a much higher energy than a couple of IR leds. :confused:

@julian

Please go back and re-read. Talking about high-output infrared LED that produces invisible light that your eye can not see. I really don't think it is a good idea to be staring at this for hour and hours. It just isn't worth the risk. Use a high output non-infrared LED for this type of setup.

Yes, they do. Secondly, exposing the head axes like any other axis also works.

Royraiden, I consider this perfectly on-topic, as NP has been attempting to get various game devs to keep the head axes hidden, thus preventing other head trackers from being used.

Think about it... If you were a developer, why would you allow generic windows axes to control sticks/throttles etc, and not the head axes?

It's not a conspiracy theory - one of the devs on the ED forums stated that they had made a deal with NP, so that non NP trackers could use three axes!

I understand your point,but seeing the trend of most of the threads on this forums, I just didnt want an endless discussion made out of just a few simple questions.Thanks again to every one for sharing your thoughts.

There is no need for high-output IR LEDs for this purpose. Thinking it isn't a good idea is different to there being actual risk of eye damage.

A quick search found this:
http://www.axis.com/products/cam_iri...Red_011107.pdf
Which is a product that emits many times more power than the small IR LED's for our purpose.

Of course, if you can find documentation stating that there is a risk from looking at a 0.1W IR LED, then I'd be interested to see it.

I'm glad you agree. Now go outside and stare at the sun for a few hours.:)

By the sounds of it then FT have finally come to the party and are doing their own thing instead of the antics it did in the past... I ain't got a concern with that if FT is stand alone, the concern was the interfacing with NP software to get the data.

in general:
true infrared light can't seen, much like ultraviolet light can't be seen.... Red though is very effective for using as a light source at night as it doesn't affect the person's night vision, like a normal light does. If you go looking directly at the sun though (definitely not suggested so please don't do this), you do get a full blast of full range of frequencies of the spectrum and at highish levels, and that includes x-rays, gamma rays, pretty much all the rays you could point the stick at.

Crikey, its a colour temp of 200k Kelvin, so don'tya go lookin' at the sun. The humble incandescent house bulb has a temp of 3200

There has been no additions or changes to FT since November 2008 - the FT interface was around before that. Also FT never gets data from TIR.

FT used to get from NP, , Julian265... that was the problem, and the site says different to what you say on which gets what from where

What are you saying FT gets/got from NP?

it used to, Julian... check the FT site for one, would you like some other sources?

Got a link?

TrackIR interfaceFreeTrack is compatible with the unencrypted version of NaturalPoint's TrackIR head tracking interface that has widespread support in simulation games. NaturalPoint have been using an encrypted version of the interface in more popular titles since late 2008, these can be identified as requiring TrackIR software version 4.1.036 or higher and are incompatible with FreeTrack.[18][19] First used in DCS: Black Shark,[20] it caused developer Eagle Dynamics to release their own head tracking interface but soon after cancelled it at NaturalPoint's request.[21] FreeTrack compatibility is still possible using [TrackIRFixer] to remove the encryption requirement, however this involves file modification which can conflict with some forms of DRM and online anti-cheat. Currently DiRT 2 and F1 2010 are affected by DRM, refusing to run after the fix has been applied.

TIRViews.dll is a dynamic-link library file distributed with TrackIR software that provides tailored support for a small number of mostly older games, using special interfaces or memory hacks to facilitate view control.[22] Though a violation of the TrackIR software's EULA,[23] it is possible to use the file with FreeTrack.

NaturalPoint's TrackIR interface SDK is only available under a signed license agreement[24] and is covered by a NDA, so while FreeTrack is open source, the TrackIR interface component is required to be closed source.[25]

wiki

OK, I thought you were saying that the FT software gets info from NP software.

Carry on.

The NP interface is NP software ;)

your ball I believe :)

You don't need to attack points that I never made. Please leave your straw man at the door.

My post:
"There has been no additions or changes to FT since November 2008 - the FT interface was around before that. Also FT never gets data from TIR."

You disagreed, which logically made me think that you were saying that FT gets data from TIR. If you want to ignore the word "data" or "info" and pretend that I was meaning differently, then you can carry on talking to yourself.

Your quote from wiki is quite valid, but it doesn't affect my views on the matter of head tracking in games.

dragging the circle around so quick, Julian?

the point addressed was your point; "Also FT never gets data from TIR". I'm sorry but you seemed to be incorrect there. I'm also sorry if you saw that as an attack, it wasn't, it was a correction. You've been shown quite clearly, it used to and in some cases still does.
I'm wondering if Dirt2 and F1 2010 are getting the same treatment ArmA 2 got?
Let's hope UBI get the DRM right on this one...


your ball again...

A sim gets joystick position info or data from a joystick.

FT does not get any data from TIR.

Get it?

perhaps you'd like to try that one again?
and don't be rude

Why everytime there is a discussion about Freetrack the end is always FT vs. TIR and copyright infringments?? The question here was "will COD support FreeTrack?". So, if NP couldn't shut down freetrack website i think there is no patent infringments and is only speculation...

nah... its obvious there is copyright infringement

The question still remains. Will freetrack work in COD? I refuse to buy trackIR.

@OP:

In my (and my squadmates') experience the "Requires a dark room to work properly most of the time" issue is the other way round, as in, TIR needs to be in dark, and FT doesn't.

I personally haven't had TIR, but my squadmates (with many different TIR versions) have reported that sunlight in the room really wreaks havoc on it. An in my personal experience FT isn't bothered by it at all.

My rig:
M$ VX3000 webcam with IR filter removed + 2 layers of floppy disc covering it from visible light.

Hat with 4 (obsolete configuration but still works with the latest FT version) super bright IR leds (TSAL5100) powered from USB port.

Price:
Webcam 20€
Leds, resistors and wiring 4€

No matter the lighting conditions my setup works perfectly smooth with 30fps.

And yes, I really hope that FT will be supported :)

-Untamo

Perhaps UBI will actually get something right and block (through DRM) it out? unless of course FT has their own bits and pieces, which don't infringe on anyone elses' copyrights, and have asked professionally for the developers to test and include it.

As I have understood, the FT did use the TIR interface in the past as it was the only way to get the tracking info in the game. Even then they had their own interface, it just wasn't used by any game.

As NP encrypted their interface, the FT community became more loud in their requests for game devs to include the FT interface. And in some happy cases they have done so.

-Untamo

Hmmm. Half of the gamers use FT. I dont believe all those people will rush out to buy TrackIR. It's funny, half of my squadmates are using Trackir and they are having problems. Software is frezzing, that flimsy clip doesn't want to stay in position etc. The other half is happy and problems free. Look what happened with Arma2. Users created a big fuss and now is suported. Suicide for COD will not be the lack of dynamic campaign and bla,bla,bla but tracking support or better, lacking of "some" head tracking support. ~S~

you two did read my last post, didn't you?

and yes, I can honestly say I've never downloaded a movie or mp3 in my life... legally or otherwise

student huh? poor huh? 4 kids huh? how did you get your computer in the first place and how did you get the operating system and other software, and how did you get your hardware? ... aannnd how did you get your games you run??

common thief... say no more

"Wolf Rider", simple as that: FreeTrack software is GNU, freeware. Have SDK inside, you can mess around as you can.

FreeTrack has your original interface that any dev can use, with lots of outputs.

The math involved in getting the 2d image of 3 points in space and output some positional data isn't NP product. NP win nothing with all "lawsuits" they try, but NP obviously give some money that some simmers give to them to make devs block FT interface and others for HT.

You know nothing, Wolf Rider. Stop talking about things you ignore, please.

And 1C, Oleg, Ilya... any word? You can't talk about it?

Why? You will be murdered by NP if so?

Really...

if ever I want some mindless nitpicks, I'll certainly PM you Stipe, you're the top of the list... see ya later sport


LoBiSoMem... then why at one stage at least, and still does according to reading, does FT pull information out of NP software?

I am pretty shure that the majority of gamers wont build something like the FT assembly!
Only geeks like us would do something like that.
Having said that i have to remark that my experience with FT and TIR is absolutely in favor of TIR as i never did get FT working reliably.
I also favor the FT support for CloD, if just to pacify the (pretty loud) minority of FT users.

errm... from where do you draw your conclusion that we are minority? :cool:

By the colour of the jackboots?

hey guys!!!i have read this thread now!
i for myself own track ir and im really enjoying it.but i convinced a friend of mine now,who normally dont play flight simulators, to buy COD, and he even bought il2 1946 two days ago, to get used to handle a simulated aircraft.yesterday i set up a coop mission to learn him the ropes. everything is fine and he really likes il2.but he has major problems to work with the hat switch to look around.so my question is where i can find a complete guide(possibly a dummies guide which explains every step) to use freetrack and mod the webcam??

JMHO. In the end I think it is about game sales. If 1C/Ubi wants to maximize revenue, it will make sure CoD allows for the use of Freetrak devices or risk losing market share. I would not expect 1C to answer officially in this thread because that would probably not make NaturalPoint happy and they do business with them. TrakIR is the industry standard and logically, CoD has to support it. In the meantime, they make NaturalPoint happy during the release run up by providing advertising in their promotional videos for CoD. But that makes no difference to me since I am a Freetrak user and spendthrift, I will simply wait to buy CoD when I have assurance from the community that the game supports Freetrak. In the meantime, I'm happy to keep playing good ol' IL-2. But given the history that there was this encrypted interface with Black Shark, then there was a "fix" and also that Eagle Dynamics was going to do their own thing, then didn't at NP request? It all seems very scripted to me. Also, I see nothing in the system requirements for CoD that says, if you use TrackIR it has to be a newer model so you can get the new version of the software that works with the encrypted interface. I guess the wait could be prolonged in the DRM? Then I look at my mouse. It is a Logitech mouse not a microsoft mouse and I am using windows software/drivers. Ok, I guess I'm really not worried about it now. Going to bed.

Its quite possible NP could not, in any way force a developer to lock other products out, if that product utilised gnu items and/ or their own items/ interfacing... NP can, and rightly so, force a developer to lock out anything which takes advantage of NP software, in any form, if they are under product licensing.
Publisher also has a choice of getting involved in the interests of protecting, or not, other softwares copyrights through DRM.

@David198502
Logitech C120 is a great webcam for this build. If you get one be aware when you remove the ir filter. Newer model has one on the "plate" not in the lense assembly. Make sure you get wide angle ir leds. You can get regular ones and sand them down if you cant find the wide angle ones.

You are absolutely correct, no one should take advantage of other peoples work.

But it is also true that FT has always had their own interface, which is totally their own.. or more correctly, no ones own, GPL licensed in other words. It just wasn't used by any games.

This of course doesn't mean that the usage of NP's interface was the right thing to do (in the past when no game utilized FT's interface).

Encryption of NP's interface now makes it impossible for the FT to utilize it, so if a new game can be played with FT, it is all their own merit, not NP's.

-Untamo

As long as anyone elses' product isn't being used against their wishes, such as NP's, then I personally don't have a problem with it... but if there are utilities that allow information to be pulled out of someone elses' work, such as NP and having their encryption busted... then yes, there is a problem. One utility made by FT allows for the NP encryption to be stripped away, allowing FT software to access NP information, therein lay the problem




"Democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give it to those who are not." - Thomas Jefferson

True, this was the case in the past, when NP used a quite simple protection, it basically wasn't even encryption. FT went past that and utilized the NP's interface, which I really do agree, was wrong of them to do.

Now they do have a real encryption, which FT has promised not to hack under the threat of a lawsuit. So, any new TIR enabled game doesn't automatically work with FT anymore. The devs have to implement the FT interface for FT to work.

-Untamo

If that is the case great, fantastic, excellent, well done (and not before time)

So, how does FT interface work?

"Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn" - Rhett Butler

NP can go get bent, for all I care... lots of smoke for nothing. if they ever had anything valid to go against FT, it would be long gone for sure. but hey, it's still here, isn't it?

I honestly don't know, I just use it :D ... The science behind it is (I am told) quite simple, and as such, free knowledge.

-Untamo

FT DIY and IR LED's
 

I don't want to go into the technical details but IR LED's are safe to use and found in a large number of everyday items. Bear in mind that the recommended IR LED's also have a very wide beam angle. The reason for using IR LED's as opposed to visible light LED's (which also emit IR but less of it) is to enable users to mask the lens from visible light and the tracking is limited to 'heat signature'. To work effectively with IR, the camera also needs to have the IR filter removed (this in itself illustrates just how much IR forms part of natural light to put it simply).
Even with the lens masked off, point the camera to your window (not the Sun!) on a sunny day and compare the IR dots with the stray reflections and direct light entering through the window- it will be significantly higher and completely kill the tracking function by swamping. Alternatively, light a candle and hold it from a distance in front of the camera..........there will be significantly higher heat signature than from an IR LED.

Finally, if building your own IR Clip there is absolutely no need to run your IR LED's at full power. Run them at 50/70% of the stated current and connect them in series (one after the other like Xmas tree lights where one pops and all go out), your batteries will last three times longer or, once it's all working and well made in terms of your wiring/soldering skills, connect the clip to the USB port.

but what you're saying doesn't seem to entirely be the case, on looking around...

1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ting_FreeTrack

and

2. it still seems that FT has to hack into NP software

some newer games do seem to be unavalaible though, with users blaming TIR, which suggests that if there a standalone FT interface, FT hasn't made the approach to developers for inclusion of their interface, or has yet to be included.

(be aware also that the FT download link goes to page with questionable security certificate)

This piece of convesation was on the FT forums? Yes, people are finding their own ways to hack the NP interface, but this isn't what the FT crew are doing.

These are individual persons hacking away to get FT to work "as it did in the olden days". So, clearly not the correct approach. They should be pleading on the devs to include the FT support to the game.

-Untamo

Wolf Rider,do you work for NP? You seem to be fighting their corner strongly? Not a dig,just interested.
As for FT and CoD,I have no idea,but I do know that any mention of FT at the UBI forum is strictly verboten,and any thread with their name is instantly moderated.
And as UBI are publishing CoD...

As an aside, I tried FT a couple of years ago,but didn't like it.I am happy enough with my TiR 3 and vector expansion.I use the track hat,as I don't like the flimsy track clip,or its usb connection.
Might treat myself to the latest model soon.

There is no point to the argument regards NP V FT and copyright. The guys at FT must have looked at NP's algorithm and came up with something identical or very close and included that as an alternative to their own FT code. To use FT with Il1946 you have to use their version of the NP algorithm (which is open source and anyone can dowload it to take a peek at it). Unfortunately, NP also looked at existing Tracking codes used in other applications and adapted it to their Headtracking product. In that respect it would have been impossible to patent the code as it was a 'development' not an 'invention'. You can write algorithims in many different ways to perform the same output data. NP could only protect their registered trademark and products that they themselves designed - hence the removal of references to the use of existing NP hardware in FT's literature. It's down to interpretation and NP consider that 'headtracking' is their intellectual property as a gaming product accessory and naturally want to protect it in other ways. The solution was simple, develop an encryption code and protect it legally. The real and only sensible argument is wether CoD should use the old code or include FT's code in addition to NP's.

my apologies, I did some proper reading and edited my post Untamo and yes I agree with the getting up the FT developers to seek inclusion - professionally.


Uther, no I don't work or are affiliated with NP, they aren't even paying me... sorry
I do however have a vested interest in people doing the right thing by others.

Again what is the point of the discussion?You guys dont seem to agree in anything.Why continue?If I could I would have locked the thread.This forum is not so useful if every thread ends up with an off topic discussion.And yes it is off topic.People here dont care what the thread is about, just post what they want and argue to death even if it is not relevant the original post.Some of you did gave me some suggestions ,thanks.No disrespect to the others.

Exactly!

I am very interested on what they will do when face-api will takeoff... AFAIK another NP is trying to get money on that thing and another free version of it will emerge... and again... they will try to encrypt it etc etc... But NP... will be out of business by then.

mmmm, no not "exactly"

FT stripped away the encryption, (encryption which was created by NP to protect what was their work, their software) there wasn't any FT developing of their own algorithms (at that time).

Ft code included as well as and seperate to NP code is fine by me

Wolf Rider,do I have to ask you personally to please dont go on with the silly discussion?

excuse me? now why would you be asking that?

you are right JG52Uther, FT is forbidden at UBI forums, and UBI is the CoD distributor, so I think this is the reason nobody here (Oleg & co.) come to confirm that CoD will only support TIR, so, yes, i believe FT will not be supported... :-x

lol...

How do you know what FT team did? It seems you had read all the source code from FT and NP for that matter... so where you work at? :-P :rolleyes:


How about we let this just drop dead and maybe a dev of CoD will make a statement about the issue the thread is about?


I want to know if I could use face api and facetracknoir with ppJoy in CoD. I don't give a damn about that NP silly interface... and their hat.

How? Its a thing called history... so roll your eyes at that perhaps ;)

Back on topic......:grin:

a) None of have a clue as to FT support so my first advice would be 'wait and see', or

b) despite the expense , invest in a ready made TrackIR solution if Vector reflection is your preferred option. I have no experience of Reflection setups with NP or FT or how well it deals with stray ambient IR reflections in camera field of view. I would personally vist the NP TrackIR forum to see if there are any issues with reliabilty and functionality.

Thank you sir.

As a long-time beta tester with NP I just wanted to raise a couple points with the caveat that, despite what might seem like a conflict of interest, I think free tracking alternatives are a great thing because not everyone can afford a TIR.

My personal experience with the NP guys is they are a really dedicated group of innovators in a smaller company that have managed to carve out a niche for themselves by creating a product that improves our simming experience. From what I've seen they are always willing to help their customers personally and often beyond what's called for, and seems a bit unfair when they are made out to be villains simply for protecting their work. Either way, that's for anyone to make their own opinion based on their own experience.

Anyway, I think it comes down to what works best for you considering the tradeoffs. FT has the benefit of being less expensive or even free if you already have a webcam and don't mind fashioning your own clip/reflector system. It's a great way to introduce yourself to head-tracking and see the benefits it provides for immersion!

Obviously the TIR gives the benefit of a more comprehensive and intuitive setup being specifically designed and supported by developers for seamless integration. The software gives better control over all axes and key-binding options, not to mention auto-detection of whatever game/sim you start which also adds to convenience, although perhaps minor for some.

The other factor to keep in mind is that the hardware itself relieves the CPU from much of the heavy lifting, providing up to 120hz refresh rate depending on the model, which improves your apparant in-game framerate considerably from the 24fps - 30fps (give or take) of your webcam. On a CPU intensive sim like CoD you need all the spare cycles you can get. With that said, some people can't tell the difference between a framerate of 20fps and 60fps so YMMV.

NP did all the legwork to make headtracking possible including wooing developers into adding the necessary hooks into their software, otherwise there would be no Freetrack, so I don't exactly blame them for not wanting to let others ride off of their work. On the other hand, if developers will support FT using FT's hooks then power to them and everybody is happy.

You can achieve much the same CPU-offloading effect with a $30 Wiimote, to be fair. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jd3-eiid-Uw TIR is very good, it's just becoming easier and easier to duplicate its functionality for a fraction of the cost. FaceAPI is another example of a piece of software that could do this very cheaply (not so cheaply for developers, however) using a $30 webcam. The only real caveat is that ideally the camera must capture at a high fps, not necessarily a high resolution, so a Playstation Eye or EyeToy camera is an ideal choice (320x240 @ 120 fps).

It's not NP technology, please! That's because NP never can put your "company face" and said what's wrong with Freetrack.

The same to some game devs. Why in hell can't Oleg or Ilya come to this forum and answer costumers questions about suport for Freetrack interface?

Bohemia Interactive GIVE FULL FREETRACK SUPORT INTO ARMAII AND O:A, so, please stop the stupid talking about legal or "moral" issues regards NP and Freetrack. We aren't stupid, respect our intelect. Or you really believe that BIS have the risk to be sued for Freetrack native suport? Read this line of the changelog of ArmAII 1.05 patch:

" [60457] New: FreeTrack support using FreeTrackClient.dll "

Other thing is the fact that NP give some kind of "help" to devs, and they have SHAME to come into public and assume a lot of things...

Isn't hard to create a clear picture about that, sorry. And it's a shame. The next step to NP will be bother Madentec?!?!?! Or better: "proprietary math"?

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc...10.1.1.50.9280

By the way, 120FPS here with PS3Eye... A cheap cam.

Johnny Chung Lee rocks. At ~3:50 when he puts on those glasses, gives a quick "check this out" glance and then does the bop and weave...that just makes me LOL!

Good Luck, LoBiSoMeM, with your crusade against the evil empire of NP.

Each of your posts pushes me a bit to the NP side, you're much too enthusiastic in promoting FT.

I don't see how these arguments, about the ethics or legality of Freetrack implementations in old games, are relevant to the question of whether Freetrack should or will be supported in Cliffs of Dover. If it is supported in Cliffs of Dover it will be done by an entirely legal and open API. Whether other uses of Freetrack are appropriate has no bearing on that.

But I feel like waffling a bit so here comes a wall of text.

Regarding Wolf_Rider's comments that Freetrack developers should "make the approach" or "seek inclusion - professionally"... "Professonal approaches" are what people with something to sell do. The Freetrack developers are not in it to make a profit. I don't understand why they *should* be expected to "approach" a sim developer. Freetrack is out there, it's open source, that's all that is needed. Oleg and his colleagues have heard of Freetrack (they must have done) and all they need to know about implementing it is readily available to them.

I am a supporter of Freetrack because I simply prefer an open and free (as in speech) implementation of head tracking to a proprietary one. A proprietary implementation will inevitably be abused by the people in control of it at the expense of current and past customers. As was the case when TrackIR started encrypting its data stream and made versions 1 and 2 of its TrackIR hardware incompatible with new games when they could otherwise still work. The controllers of a proprietary implementation might also seek to stifle competition from other proprietary or open implementations. As was the case when "Implementation of the "HeadTracker" interface <was> canceled at the request of NaturalPoint." in DCS: Black Shark.

A minor claim I'd like to assert would be that Naturalpoint created the market for head-tracking. They did not create head-tracking itself (and they have been awarded no patents on TrackIR). Naturalpoint's business model was fundamentally based on marketing - advertising of one kind or another - not technical innovation. They hyped the idea of head-tracking up, to sell the head-tracking kits they manufactured. They have been well paid for creating the market... for a while they were the only big player in the market, so all of the sales in the market they had created went to them.

In other words, they have already been paid for their hard work. They are not "entitled" to further income on anything head-tracking-related like the holder of a patent would be. In my opinion.

If they can still make money selling a proprietary head-tracking implementation when other viable head-tracking implementations exist then fair play to them. If they succeed in doing so it will probably be the case, much of the time*, that they are being paid for their marketing efforts rather than for their technical brilliance. It would be wrong if their continued success was due to monopolistic practices - marketing taken too far.

*(I say "much of the time" because (I don't know whether it's the minority or majority, and because) many people buy TrackIR rather than, say, setting up their own Freetrack kit, not based on a carefully considered weighing up of the options but because they have been advertised to (in one of many ways) by Naturalpoint. Blackdog_kt, who wrote a thorough explanation of his preferences on the first page of this topic, would be a clear exception to this. And good for him.)

I'd like to respond to a few of CharveL's points.
I can afford a TrackIR and don't want it. Philosophical disagreement with TrackIR aside, I would consider Freetrack to be more than an "introduction" to head-tracking. I'm looking at building myself a Freetrack setup and do not see how NaturalPoint's head-tracking implementation would be an upgrade for me, even if money wasn't a factor.

A Wiimote, when used with Freetrack, does the tracking in hardware. It also has a rather high refresh rate of 100Hz. Using a Wiimote, of course, is just one way of using Freetrack. People are free to use other devices as they see fit because Freetrack is open source.

I disagree. NP did the legwork to make headtracking popular. And they have already been paid for that work. They don't have a divine right to be the only head tracking implementation available. It's a little bit like saying "Apple did all the legwork to make MP3 players popular". Yes, they did a lot of the legwork of making MP3 players popular by advertising the heck out of the iPod, but they were given their reward for it in iPod sales. And they'd have been irrational to think that this means that no competing MP3 players should exist, or that the iPod should retain its market share forever in spite of competition.

One problem with this analogy is that it refers to hardware rather than software. Another problem is that Apple might very well have some MP3 player-related patents whereas Naturalpoint do not have any patents on TrackIR.

What I don't understand is why the web cam manufacturers don't exploit the Freetrack bandwagon. I think there is money to be made for them and game developers like 1C. A large manufacturer like Logitech could simply take one of their existing cheap azz cameras, remove the IR filter, call it a "Freetrak Camera", and make some money on volume sale. A game developer like IC could approach Logitech and maybe pick up a royalty on the Logitech camera sales of those types of cameras by including the Freetrak functionality in CoD and advertising as such. Heck, 1C/Ubisoft could even sell it as a CoD/Logitech Cam bundle. Maybe even get RadioShack in on the deal to supply the infrared LEDs. And since the IR filter would be gone, it's not like Logitech would be displacing a future sale on another normal web cam.

not really, NP were within their rights to stop people using their dll, but when they stop developers from using their own way of relaying information to other devices this is simply anti-competitive behaviour (don't do it or you wont get TIR).
Unfortunately, this sort of crap is bogging down the planet these days, it's often dressed up as "IP" protection, but what it often really is is "my company has more money and better lawyers, don't p*ss with us".

"simply for protecting their work" - does this extend to lobbying developers to exclude compatibility with other people's work (not just FT)? (this is my only problem with them, apart from screwing TIR 1 and 2 owners)

FT 6dof @ 30 FPS plus frame interpolation took less than 1% of CPU time on an E8400 - it won't have any noticable effect on the frame rate of any game.

They've wooed developers into implementing an interface which ONLY ACCEPTS TIR, which was the logical thing for them to do. However, they're still lobbying for the exclusion of a generic interface (like mice/joysticks/throttles/wheels/pedals use) - which is holding back competition and development.

its NP software, and that is what they are protecting, with every right to do so


wot, use somebody elses' (FT) gear without their permission, or include a method of FT gear getting stuck into somebody elses' (NP) software.

nah... the professional thing to do is to make the approach and seek inclusion, offering a proper product.


NP were protecting their rights... if the FT software did its own work, instead of syphoning off from somebody elses', you'd find it would have been a completely different ballgame - be sure



correct and completely understandable for NP to professionally make the approach to seek inclusion and then protect their software, after all, they made the effort. Would it have been too hard for FT to develop their own interface in the beginning, instead of hacking another?


do you have some proof of that?

and

how does that gear get to work in the games at the moment and has been for many years now?