Kinect technology thread

If they don't add a higher resolution depth camera, what's the point in Kinect 2?! It's necessary for better tracking and solving some of the control issues of Kinect. Perhaps high priority would be lag reduction, but then they'll want a high-res depth camera for quality finger tracking and everything better sight would bring.
 
Shifty Geezer said:
If they don't add a higher resolution depth camera, what's the point in Kinect 2?! It's necessary for better tracking and solving some of the control issues of Kinect. Perhaps high priority would be lag reduction, but then they'll want a high-res depth camera for quality finger tracking and everything better sight would bring.
Click to expand...

Ideally, yes.

But bang for the buck, they get more out of adding a high def RGB cam than they do for a HD depth cam. So if it comes down to it, and they only have the budget for 1 HD cam, it will be RGB, not depth.

Don't forget it's not as though the RGB cam gives them nothing. Details like fingers, lips, eyes, brows, etc can be tracked by the RGB as long as the depth cam is culling data outside the figures.

The depth cam could be used to cull image data outside of the tracked figure(s) enabling higher resolution imagery to be sent over the same usb2 cable.

I think the budget would be better utilized in HD RGB camera and on-board processor power to enable lower lag.
 
I think anything less than two HD cameras is a waste of time, personally. They are such a commodity part now that cost is immaterial. The real cost will be processing requirements, and whether that's performed on Kinect or the console. I also don't see the interest in launching Kinect2 on XB360 as you do. What better way to get existing Kinect enthusiasts to buy into the new platform than by offering the improved experience exclusively on XB3? That would have been like Nintendo launching Wiimotes for GC. It'd also gimp Kinect2 on the new console, or add complexity in supporting two different platforms. It's pretty rare for an new official peripheral like a camera or controller or headset to be supported on the old platform, so why start now when you're wanting to give people reasons to pony up and build your new console's install base?
 
hoho said:
Who said they should stay with that lousy 0.3MPix camera? Even my laptop's built-in thingy has 4x more pixels than that.

To get a good enough depthmap for lip-reading they'd need several orders of magnitude more samples with the IR camera they currently use. With plain-old RGB camera it's trivial. Not so with the method they use to get the depth samples and to actually read those samples they'd still need a very high-resolution camera to actually be capable of reading the IR dots they generate.

Basically what I'm saying is there is no real point on doing that detailed depthmap for lip-reading when you can do it just as easily (or probably even easier) with image-based lip reading. Especially because the depth difference between lips/mouth/rest of the face is so tiny that it'll be a nightmare to figure out the lip movement just from the depthmap.
Click to expand...

I couldn't find any working links now, but when kinect got teared down i remember hearing that both cameras were actually 1600x1200, both close to 2 megapixels, and capable of a maximum throughput of 60fps (but i have no idea at which resolution)...

No idea as to why all the links that stated this resolution no longer works (but google still can find them), but i did find this other working link where it is claimed both cameras operate with 1.3 megapixels sensors: http://www.chipworks.com/en/technic...e-microsoft-kinect-focused-on-motion-capture/

Doing this search, i just realized just how much conflicting information there is regarding kinect's real specs. XD
 
Shifty Geezer said:
I also don't see the interest in launching Kinect2 on XB360 as you do. What better way to get existing Kinect enthusiasts to buy into the new platform....
Click to expand...

Marketing

The appeal for kinect based systems and sales is directly tied to how much the experience costs.

The "family" console can get by with peripheral price gouging eventually nickel and diming everyone to death *cough* Wii *cough* but to try and lure them in with appealing hardware which costs $400-$500 for the console alone is too much.

Casuals/Family won't budge.

How does this fit in?

Kinect is for casuals/family buyers.

Hardcore gamers for the most part DESPISE kinect. They hate it. I don't see them "jumping in" with Kinect2 either. At least not initially.

So then, there is no need to try and tie Kinect2 up with xb720 as the initial buyers of xb720 will not be the ones interested in kinect2.

Conversely, MS does have a handy dandy console out right now which can cater perfectly to the kids/family/casuals market which could also benefit from having a new HD kinect which is less laggy and higher resolution (and perhaps better optimized for smaller rooms).

This also enables the marketing message to be clearer and more effective:

xb720 = Hardcore (Gears, Samaritan, COD, BF, etc)

xb360 (aka kinectbox) = family/kids/casual

In summary: frankly, MS doesn't want the casuals/kinect-fans buying into xb720 at launch.

They buy fewer games which will not help to offset the losses of the launch units (typically upwards of $100).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
TheChefO said:
Interesting teardown ...

It could be that these were the cheapest vga cameras MS could source and though they can technically operate at 1.3mp, that doesn't mean they need to operate at that res.

The other possibility is that they can capture 1.3mp, but not at 30fps.
Click to expand...

The link has the datasheet from the depth sensor. It can capture 1.3 megapixel at 30fps (or since the way prime sense tech works, effectively quartering the resolution, it can actually produce a 640x480 @30fps depth image).

No link for the rgb camera, though. But giving the manufacturer and model shouldn't be too hard to google it...
 
Wow, it was easy :p

www.riddle.ru/dl/ccd/micron/mt9m112.pdf

The color sensor can indeed only output 1.3 megapixel @ 15fps.

Funny that the kinect sdk for windows from Ms does expose this mode (1.3 megapixel @ 15fps) but i though it was due bandwidth constraints...

But, that Biggest Loser that spoke to Digital Foundry did state that what was keeping kinect from outputting a HD color image @ 30fps was the usb not the sensor itself XD
 
TheChefO said:
The "family" console can get by with peripheral price gouging eventually nickel and diming everyone to death *cough* Wii *cough* but to try and lure them in with appealing hardware which costs $400-$500 for the console alone is too much.
Click to expand...
Alternatively you include Kinect2 as part of the overall system, so it's $400-500 at launch and no more. You add Kinect experiences using the advanced features that appeal to core gamers, such as headtracking for racing and better controls in the UI, which as I understand it go down well. Face reading offers some significant next-gen potential. If Kinect 2 is just going to be Kinect limb-thrashing in high-def, there's no point in releasing it any more than there was Sony releasing an HD camera for PS3 that was used for almost nothing until they got around to launching Move. As you say, may as well just combine the existing Kinect with 360 in a cheap mass-market box and leave XB3 for the conventional gaming. Then wait until XB3 hits mainstream prices before introducuing a next-gen Kinect.
 
Shifty Geezer said:
Alternatively you include Kinect2 as part of the overall system, so it's $400-500 at launch and no more.
Click to expand...

Won't fly with the demographic that is interested.

That approach (everything included but the kitchen sink) didn't sit well with early adopters on ps3 ... I'm not seeing it have great effect with family/casuals.

Hardcore won't mind the price too much, but isn't interested in Kinect.

Casual/Family interested in kinect, but won't pay that much.

Best route would be to leave it as a separate device and improve it with cross compatibility (xb360+xb720) to the platform that IS interested in it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Shifty Geezer said:
Then wait until XB3 hits mainstream prices before introducuing a next-gen Kinect.
Click to expand...

They don't need to do anything that drastic. But if for whatever reason, they decide that kinect2 will not be compatible with xb360, then it would be best to wait a few years before introducing it for proper effect.
 
TheChefO said:
Marketing

The appeal for kinect based systems and sales is directly tied to how much the experience costs.

The "family" console can get by with peripheral price gouging eventually nickel and diming everyone to death *cough* Wii *cough* but to try and lure them in with appealing hardware which costs $400-$500 for the console alone is too much.

Casuals/Family won't budge.

How does this fit in?

Kinect is for casuals/family buyers.

Hardcore gamers for the most part DESPISE kinect. They hate it. I don't see them "jumping in" with Kinect2 either. At least not initially.

So then, there is no need to try and tie Kinect2 up with xb720 as the initial buyers of xb720 will not be the ones interested in kinect2.

Conversely, MS does have a handy dandy console out right now which can cater perfectly to the kids/family/casuals market which could also benefit from having a new HD kinect which is less laggy and higher resolution (and perhaps better optimized for smaller rooms).

This also enables the marketing message to be clearer and more effective:

xb720 = Hardcore (Gears, Samaritan, COD, BF, etc)

xb360 (aka kinectbox) = family/kids/casual

In summary: frankly, MS doesn't want the casuals/kinect-fans buying into xb720 at launch.

They buy fewer games which will not help to offset the losses of the launch units (typically upwards of $100).
Click to expand...

Thats a sensible statement...personally i can see 2 sides..
1) They want to get mass adoption of Kinect..so including it in the box would enable that long term=developer confidence=more games for the platform.

2)The prospect that you mention with 360 being entry level/core/casual and having something like a Kinect 2 bundled would make alot of sense..and also give the 360 some more legs, it would also enable micorsoft to design a more advanced 720..with out the need to worry about the price point so much...no the BOM of Kinect 2 bundled + no Die space allocation for extra processing.

A couple of notes on that...firstly to reduce the lag..more processing would be required...im not sure whether it would be more cost efective to have an ARM Cortex solution intergrated into Kinect2..or whats being proposed by utilising a whole PPC core inside the new console....ive changed my mind after reading your post, i now think that having the Kinect 2 with its own processing would allow the cost of that to be recouped with the sale of the Kinect...also allowing more expensive PPC budget to be allocated directly to games in the new console....=better games.

The 360 would also continue to sell very well as a budget platform, maybe with Kinect 2 bundled or something increasing adoption...

Regarding the cameras;Im agree that for the platform to have proper abilities it need HD cameras all round..they are not that expensive now..and the margins of Kinect were already very good....any cost can be recouped in the Kinect 2 RRP..(if sold as a stand alone product)
 
french toast said:
Thats a sensible statement...personally i can see 2 sides..
1) They want to get mass adoption of Kinect..so including it in the box would enable that long term=developer confidence=more games for the platform.

2)The prospect that you mention with 360 being entry level/core/casual and having something like a Kinect 2 bundled would make alot of sense..and also give the 360 some more legs, it would also enable micorsoft to design a more advanced 720..with out the need to worry about the price point so much...no the BOM of Kinect 2 bundled + no Die space allocation for extra processing.

A couple of notes on that...firstly to reduce the lag..more processing would be required...im not sure whether it would be more cost efective to have an ARM Cortex solution intergrated into Kinect2..or whats being proposed by utilising a whole PPC core inside the new console....ive changed my mind after reading your post, i now think that having the Kinect 2 with its own processing would allow the cost of that to be recouped with the sale of the Kinect...also allowing more expensive PPC budget to be allocated directly to games in the new console....=better games.

The 360 would also continue to sell very well as a budget platform, maybe with Kinect 2 bundled or something increasing adoption...

Regarding the cameras;Im agree that for the platform to have proper abilities it need HD cameras all round..they are not that expensive now..and the margins of Kinect were already very good....any cost can be recouped in the Kinect 2 RRP..(if sold as a stand alone product)
Click to expand...

My 2 cents with a Kinect in the house. Kinect 2 would have to give something to the non casuals if they want to include it at launch. I can see the idea with the "casual" gamer group and the family stuff. But they have a Wii and or a Kinect/Move right now as an option at the right price. In other words, it would take something very special for me if a Kinect 2 should be tempting. Happy Action Theater 2 would be a good start! ok serously, it would take a true shift from the kind a games we have now to something that combines the controller with the kinect 2 to give me a truely new gaming experience. My personal dream, would be something that challenges mouse+keyboard for control.
 
2 x Move + Kinect (at least 60Hz) would resolve all my complaints about Kinect for Core games, especially if those "Move-like" controllers can be "snapped" together into a more traditional design or, minimally, can mimic the controller input wise (triggers, buttons, sticks). The problem with Kinect, for core games, is it offers no good way to move in 3D space which is where the industry has moved to since the PS1/N64.
 
LightHeaven said:
The capture seems flawless... What are the chances of we getting some dual kinect action on Xbox 720?
Click to expand...
Flawless capture would be really cool, but I foresee cable management issues with two separate units placed so far apart, as well as problems with physical space requirements. One kinect is OK to find a spot for, near the TV. There's usually a shelf or a console of some sort available for the unit to sit on. But where would you put Kinect #2 in most rooms...?

And at least current kinects are kind of wonky in the fairly large distance they need between players and the unit itself - although this might be fixable with updated hardware. If not, you'd need a BIG room to play around in! Not everybody lives like that, so market uptake would be very small, making me think MS won't be very interested in such a setup.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
Discussion about lighting (usage of lighting techniques).
2
Replies
21
Views
1K
Frenetic Pony
F
W
New Qualcomm silicon for new Surface May 2024
Replies
7
Views
777
Cyan
Cyan
X
Shimmering lines, common in menus, HUDs: Term for the artifact? And possible to "fix" with post-processing?
2
Replies
26
Views
2K
Davros
D
Shifty Geezer
Digital Foundry Article Technical Discussion [2024]
50 51 52
Replies
1K
Views
78K
trinibwoy
T
B
Upscaling Technology Has Become A Crutch
13 14 15
Replies
282
Views
22K
vjPiedPiper
V
Back
Top