From: brucec@phoebus.labs.tek.com (Bruce Cohen)
Subject: Re: head tracking
Date: 26 Nov 91 20:00:05 GMT
Organization: Computer Research Lab, Tektronix Inc.



In article <1991Nov25.211301.21688@milton.u.washington.edu> azuma@cs.unc.edu 
(Ronald Azuma) writes:

>         This system is an experimental one and has problems.  The biggest
> is the combination of weight and lack of head rotation range.  The "cameras"
> and lenses are too heavy, which limits us to four "cameras," which is not 
> enough to let you tilt your head as much as you would like.  We need to make
> the head-unit lighter so we can eventually put more "cameras" on the head 
> that will provide the desired rotation range.

Could you explain why you decided to put the LEDs in the room, and the
cameras on the head?  I would have thought that putting the LEDs on a
headband or some such would be easier on the user, and would allow
better coverage.  For instance, bending over could be handled if there
were two sets of LEDs, one pointed generally upward and one downward,
with the sets spaced around the circumference of the head.  You could
easily use 8 or 16 LEDs, so each would have to cover much less than an octant
of (dare I say it?) headspace.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Speaker-to-managers, aka
Bruce Cohen, Computer Research Lab        email: brucec@crl.labs.tek.com
Tektronix Laboratories, Tektronix, Inc.                phone: (503)627-5241
M/S 50-662, P.O. Box 500, Beaverton, OR  97077