G+_Ben Reese Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 Just watched 176 where Fr. Robert Ballecer, SJ? and Bryan Burnett? showed off the tiny cameras to be used in the FPV quadcopter build. How possible/difficult would it be to mount 2 of these to the craft and feed the two feeds to the independent eyes? My thinking is that depth perception is lost since it's normally a 2D feed, but 3D could make things much easier. Next step could be mounting the 2 sensors to a servo and adding head tracking to look left/right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_Jason Perry Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 I have been wondering this for awhile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_Ben Reese Posted January 9, 2016 Author Share Posted January 9, 2016 Ha. Before this post I did a quick Google search and someone hacked together a dual-feed goggle set using 2 matching units. I was wondering about the signal thing too - and this is more the Business Analyst in me thinking - I don't know how to actually implement this ?... What if the frames were split between the two cameras? According to the RTF product page, the cameras have 60 (or 50) Hz refresh rate, so half of that should be sufficient for each eye to get a decent image. I don't see any bandwidth specs on the transmitter though, so I don't know whether that would be a bottle neck and drop frames. On the receiving end, it may not be too difficult to hack together something to separate the signals - especially if separate transmitters are used for each camera. Then the goggles... All the cheap ideas I've thought of are pretty kludgy... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_Steve Martin Posted January 11, 2016 Share Posted January 11, 2016 If you don't blow the weight budget, you are very likely to blow the dollar budget. As I recall the idea is to stay below the FAA 250gram limit. Maybe possible without the head tracking, which I think is a bit much anyway. With a Quad going any which way, having your head offline with the flight controller path seems pretty scary to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_Ben Reese Posted January 11, 2016 Author Share Posted January 11, 2016 Yeah, I wouldn't expect it to be under the 250g limit. I agree that head tracking off the normal heading of the quad is dangerous, but it's also possible to fly left and right in addition to the front and back. If the head tracking is good enough, it could make flying POV much safer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_Steve Martin Posted January 11, 2016 Share Posted January 11, 2016 I'd worry about lag in the head tracking as well. Then again I guess if the FPV has little enough latency to be a viable way to fly, then head tracking might also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_Steve Martin Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 I would think response time from head movement to servo movement to video response would have to be noticeable. Companies have spent years and millions to eliminate perceived lag in VR headsets. Hard to believe it can be made unnoticeable with a few dollars worth of hardware. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts