It is currently Tue Jun 25, 2019 12:15 pm



Reply to topic  [ 118 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next
 Using the rift with an RCA signal 
Author Message
Two Eyed Hopeful

Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2013 4:01 pm
Posts: 68
Reply with quote
I'm extremely interested in using the rift for FPV radio control flying, but the problem is getting the RCA signal from the receiver to work with the rift. I understand this could be difficult due to the warping and duplicating involved.. But what exactly would one need to do? Maybe running the signal through a cheap PC like the raspberry pi which again feeds to the rift via HDMI? Would that be at all possible?


Fri Feb 08, 2013 4:23 pm
Profile
Golden Eyed Wiseman! (or woman!)

Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2012 8:18 pm
Posts: 1329
Reply with quote
The Rift dev kit will have HDMI/DVI inputs so you need something that can feed it that signal - a RaspberryPi should work. Then you also have to format the image to be side-by-side, which should be simple enough and as you mention, warp the image. Also note that the FOV of the cameras are unlikely to be the same as the Rift's. I don't mean to try to change your mind, but is there a reason you want to use the Rift in particular for this, as there are some other HMDs out there that might make implementation easier.


Fri Feb 08, 2013 4:55 pm
Profile
Certif-Eyable!
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 9:10 am
Posts: 1057
Location: Germany
Reply with quote
The biggest advantage to that would be, that the Rift is a very cheap way to do it and it allows for better and better integration.
Do you know that jet video where they have a moving camera in the cockpit?
It really feels like flying a jet ... a toy jet, but a real jet all the same. If someone creates a ready-to-go solution for a quadcopter that would be of interest to many people!

_________________
want to demo the Rift or check it out? click here


Fri Feb 08, 2013 5:08 pm
Profile WWW
Petrif-Eyed
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 10:47 pm
Posts: 2708
Reply with quote
MSat wrote:
The Rift dev kit will have HDMI/DVI inputs so you need something that can feed it that signal - a RaspberryPi should work. Then you also have to format the image to be side-by-side, which should be simple enough and as you mention, warp the image. Also note that the FOV of the cameras are unlikely to be the same as the Rift's. I don't mean to try to change your mind, but is there a reason you want to use the Rift in particular for this, as there are some other HMDs out there that might make implementation easier.
You could use a fisheye lens on your FPV camera, like this:



Then you could use a warp filter that converts from fisheye distortion to Rift pre-warp video. If you use a RasPi for HDMI out, you would need to use a USB video capture stick with it (hopefully with ARM linux drivers for it).

_________________
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. Image


Fri Feb 08, 2013 6:20 pm
Profile
Golden Eyed Wiseman! (or woman!)

Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2011 11:47 pm
Posts: 1498
Reply with quote
Nice point using physical lenses to predistort the image.

Re:
Quote:
the FOV of the cameras are unlikely to be the same as the Rift's


Lots of FPV cameras now have 90+ degree FOV, which should be sufficient.

I'm interested in this area as well. I've already figured out I can probably use a 2D-3D image converter to make 2 images with zero separation, so its just the distortion aspect that is the troublesome part IMHO.


Fri Feb 08, 2013 6:57 pm
Profile
Terrif-eying the Ladies!
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2013 2:05 am
Posts: 910
Reply with quote
http://www.omnitech.com/pdf/ORIFL190-3%20rev%209.pdf

micro fish eye. A bit pricey at $250 each, but an F of 2.8, so it can do low light. 180 deg field. Very nice, and possibly find a cheaper lens.....maybe these guys might know the right lens choice:

http://ragecams.com/shop/index.php?osCs ... 3b95b8ed25



stereo ntsc 480 line camera, with 6.5cm IPD, designed from the ground up for FPV use

http://www.nghobbies.com/cart/index.php ... cts_id=393


high end laptop on location, with video capture, and then the rift attached.

_________________
Intelligence... is not inherent - it is a point in understanding. Q: When does a fire become self sustaining?


Last edited by KBK on Fri Feb 08, 2013 7:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.



Fri Feb 08, 2013 6:58 pm
Profile
Petrif-Eyed
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 10:47 pm
Posts: 2708
Reply with quote
KBK wrote:
http://www.omnitech.com/pdf/ORIFL190-3%20rev%209.pdf

micro fish eye

stereo ntsc 480 line camera, with 6.5cm IPD, designed from the gorund up for FPV use

http://www.nghobbies.com/cart/index.php ... cts_id=393
That PDF ends with a price quote of $250. They are kidding right?

I just used an inexpensive 180-degree "peep-hole" door viewer that I got at the dollar store, but you can also get for $5-10 at a typical hardware store:

Image

If you unscrew the door mount, the remaining fisheye lens can be attached to a mini camera with suitable adhesive. Not as nice as the "correct" lens above, but MUCH cheaper.

I do like that 3D field-sequential camera though, albeit a bit expensive. Every extra pricey item on a remote FPV vehicle just adds to the heartbreak WHEN you lose it.

_________________
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. Image


Last edited by geekmaster on Fri Feb 08, 2013 7:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.



Fri Feb 08, 2013 7:07 pm
Profile
Petrif-Eyed
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 10:47 pm
Posts: 2708
Reply with quote
Duplicate post? Grr...

_________________
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. Image


Last edited by geekmaster on Fri Feb 08, 2013 7:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.



Fri Feb 08, 2013 7:09 pm
Profile
Petrif-Eyed
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 10:47 pm
Posts: 2708
Reply with quote
Duplicate post? Grr...

These last two duplicates were created by Edit / Submit taking me back to the edit box. Clicking submit again creates a duplicate. I am using Google Chrome. Hmm...

_________________
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. Image


Fri Feb 08, 2013 7:10 pm
Profile
Binocular Vision CONFIRMED!

Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2013 12:30 pm
Posts: 337
Reply with quote
You would need 3 things, if it's anything like console converting.

1. 3d camera on the drone (wireless feed probably)
2. The correct video adapters and a tuner card.
3. A special video codec (for warping) and software that displays the live feed

Or....

Some sort of fancy 3d/warp converter box.


Fri Feb 08, 2013 7:14 pm
Profile
Terrif-eying the Ladies!
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2013 2:05 am
Posts: 910
Reply with quote
yeah, $250 is kinda high. But the lens is also premium built, for when you want to put a HD sensor behind it, so it can be used in precision robotics. That refocusing, lens repositioning does not require re-calibration of the software table.

I'm sure there has to be some cheapies out there somewhere, for the folks who don't need a premium version.

Lens coatings are critical, IMO and IME, and a door lens is not going to be coated.

OK. found some. These guys can probably sell just the lens alone (they have many lenses):

http://3rdeye-minicam.en.made-in-china. ... AB18-.html

_________________
Intelligence... is not inherent - it is a point in understanding. Q: When does a fire become self sustaining?


Fri Feb 08, 2013 7:21 pm
Profile
Petrif-Eyed
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 10:47 pm
Posts: 2708
Reply with quote
You can get a nice "1/3" Mini Lens 1.7 mm Ultra Wide Angle (Fish Eye View)" for $39.99 from an ebay store:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/1-3-Mini-Lens-1 ... 06c&_uhb=1

Image

_________________
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. Image


Fri Feb 08, 2013 7:39 pm
Profile
Two Eyed Hopeful

Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2013 4:01 pm
Posts: 68
Reply with quote
Would a fisheye lens really be necessary? I plan to use a Gopro, which has a pretty wide FOV already.

And 3d won't be necessary, it's fine to duplicate one image to both eyes.

So, if I understand this correctly, there's no easy solution to this right now, right? But it's possible, and the demand is there.


Sat Feb 09, 2013 4:10 am
Profile
Golden Eyed Wiseman! (or woman!)

Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2011 11:47 pm
Posts: 1498
Reply with quote
@ Direlight:
Quote:
1. 3d camera on the drone (wireless feed probably)


I think you can just use a 2d camera and a 2D-3D converter with the separation set to minimum/zero (if it goes that low). That would map the 2D picture into 2, 2D pictures, outputted side by side in 3D mode. Something like one of these:

http://dx.com/p/mini-2d-to-3d-hd-video- ... ack-110217

So, if we can predistort the image with a fisheye, that should hopefully be ok for FPV, without needing PC hardware for the conversion...

@ Grix:
Quote:
Would a fisheye lens really be necessary? I plan to use a Gopro, which has a pretty wide FOV already.


I dont think the problem is the FOV, as much as the fact that the image will be distorted on the Rift, unless we either undistort it using some sort of PC interface, or use a predistortion lens on the FPV camera to correct the imagery (which sounds much easier to me).


Sat Feb 09, 2013 5:27 am
Profile
Binocular Vision CONFIRMED!
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2012 8:58 am
Posts: 213
Location: Dortmund, Germany
Reply with quote
Oh yeah! When I first saw the Rift i immediately had to think on those guys who are flying their RC Planes with a HMD. And I imagined how it would be too look around with the Rift from above.
(I can't find the video I was looking for but this is very similar:)


Unfortunately a nice a plane is way to expensive for me. (Budget for me for such a Project would me < 200$, excluding the Rift off course).

Reading this Thread I had to think on that nano Copter "Crazy Fly":

@2.17 someone added a small Camera to it. But I don't think his hack supports live streaming(?)
You can control it by PC via a PS3 Controller but there will be an SDK

_________________
German blogger, enthusiast and developer.
Image


Sat Feb 09, 2013 7:09 am
Profile WWW
Cross Eyed!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 11:10 pm
Posts: 163
Reply with quote
I really hope Palmer weighs in on this, as I am very interested in doing FPV flying as well with the Rift.

_________________
www.abcliveit.com Change your life! PM for details


Sat Feb 09, 2013 7:31 am
Profile
Golden Eyed Wiseman! (or woman!)

Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2011 11:47 pm
Posts: 1498
Reply with quote
Were you looking for the vid with the FPV jet? Thats a cool FPV one. The floatplane one is nice as well! The prop always annoys me though when I film on a tractor plane.

The nano quad looks pretty cool! Great performance!


Sat Feb 09, 2013 8:36 pm
Profile
Two Eyed Hopeful

Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2013 4:01 pm
Posts: 68
Reply with quote
Bump..

I did some searching and I found these two thingies. If I run the signal through both of these, with the 3d converter set to side by side and lowest possible depth, would that work? Would there be any notable latency? Does anyone have experience with these sort of converters?

www.ebay.com/itm/280993783685
www.ebay.com/itm/170976138135


Tue Feb 19, 2013 11:50 am
Profile
Petrif-Eyed
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 10:47 pm
Posts: 2708
Reply with quote
Grix wrote:
Bump..

I did some searching and I found these two thingies. If I run the signal through both of these, with the 3d converter set to side by side and lowest possible depth, would that work? Would there be any notable latency? Does anyone have experience with these sort of converters?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/280993783685
http://www.ebay.com/itm/170976138135
Thanks for these links!

They look like they should work fine (if a fisheye lens provides adequate pre-warp for your needs). The pair should make a nice compact low-power solution to get RCA video into a Rift. I just ordered one of each.

There are people working on getting an EasyCAP USB TV/Video Capture device ($6.59 on eBay) working on a Raspberry Pi, but I did not see any success reports yet. So for now, these devices should be a "plug and play" standalone solution that should work well for FPV. Perhaps when a RasPi solution is ready, a Rift pre-warp filter could be added, and it should also be a bit less expensive than these standalone devices.

_________________
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. Image


Tue Feb 19, 2013 12:25 pm
Profile
Two Eyed Hopeful

Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2013 4:01 pm
Posts: 68
Reply with quote
geekmaster wrote:
Grix wrote:
Bump..

I did some searching and I found these two thingies. If I run the signal through both of these, with the 3d converter set to side by side and lowest possible depth, would that work? Would there be any notable latency? Does anyone have experience with these sort of converters?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/280993783685
http://www.ebay.com/itm/170976138135
Thanks for these links!

They look like they should work fine (if a fisheye lens provides adequate pre-warp for your needs). The pair should make a nice compact low-power solution to get RCA video into a Rift. I just ordered one of each.

There are people working on getting an EasyCAP USB TV/Video Capture device ($6.59 on eBay) working on a Raspberry Pi, but I did not see any success reports yet. So for now, these devices should be a "plug and play" standalone solution that should work well for FPV. Perhaps when a RasPi solution is ready, a Rift pre-warp filter could be added, and it should also be a bit less expensive than these standalone devices.


Definitely sounds interesting. I suspect that software solutions like that might cause too much latency for FPV though.. At least on such "weak" hardware as an rpi.

I also wonder if the gopro FOV is enough of a fisheye lens on it's own..

Let me know your findings when the devices arrive! :)


Tue Feb 19, 2013 1:24 pm
Profile
Petrif-Eyed
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 10:47 pm
Posts: 2708
Reply with quote
Grix wrote:
Definitely sounds interesting. I suspect that software solutions like that might cause too much latency for FPV though.. At least on such "weak" hardware as an rpi.

I also wonder if the gopro FOV is enough of a fisheye lens on it's own..

Let me know your findings when the devices arrive! :)
We do not know the latency of THESE standalone boxes yet. Putting the two in series will just add their latencies together. For all we know, a RasPI could possibly be lower latency than this pair of video conversion boxes.

And driving camera pan and tilt servos will certainly add their own latency to the mix, depending on whether you use analog or digital servos. The RF link also sends all the channels out round-robin (for an analog R/C transmitter like I use), so there would be extra variable latency from when you move your head until it is time to transmit the positions for each of the pan and tilt servos. That variable latency would be detected as jitter, which is more obvious to the eye than just a slow frame update rate.

But FPV users are already accustomed to these latency issues, and still find FPV flying enjoyable. If you cannot handle pan and tilt latency, just use a fixed camera and change your viewpoint by steering the R/C aircraft.

There may be even more latency issues to take into account, but that is all that came to mind at this moment. Just remember that FPV has different goals and latency requirements than VR applications, and decide how you want to spend your time and money.

_________________
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. Image


Last edited by geekmaster on Tue Feb 19, 2013 2:06 pm, edited 2 times in total.



Tue Feb 19, 2013 1:51 pm
Profile
Two Eyed Hopeful

Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2013 4:01 pm
Posts: 68
Reply with quote
geekmaster wrote:
Grix wrote:
Definitely sounds interesting. I suspect that software solutions like that might cause too much latency for FPV though.. At least on such "weak" hardware as an rpi.

I also wonder if the gopro FOV is enough of a fisheye lens on it's own..

Let me know your findings when the devices arrive! :)
We do not know the latency of THESE standalone boxes yet. Putting the two in series will just add their latencies together. For all we know, a RasPI could possibly be lower latency than this pair of video conversion boxes.

And driving camera pan and tilt servos will certainly add their own latency to the mix, depending on whether you use analog or digital servos. The RF link also sends all the channels out round-robin (for an analog R/C transmitter like I use), so there would be extra variable latency from when you move your head until it is time to transmit the positions for each of the pan and tilt servos. That variable latency would be detected as jitter, which is more obvious to the eye than just a slow frame update rate.

But FPV users are already accustomed to these latency issues, and still find FPV flying enjoyable. If you cannot handle pan and tilt latency, just use a fixed camera and change your viewpoint by steering the R/C aircraft.

There may be even more latency issues to take into account, but that is all that came to mind at this moment. Just remember that FPV has different goals and latency requirements than VR applications, and decide how you want to spend your time and money.


I wasn't really planning to use headtracking and camera servos.. At least not yet :) I just want the base latency to be as low as possible, because obviously half a second of latency can mean the difference between a crash and smooth sailing when flying live, at least in complicated environments.


Tue Feb 19, 2013 2:03 pm
Profile
Petrif-Eyed
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 10:47 pm
Posts: 2708
Reply with quote
Grix wrote:
I wasn't really planning to use headtracking and camera servos.. At least not yet :) I just want the base latency to be as low as possible, because obviously half a second of latency can mean the difference between a crash and smooth sailing when flying live, at least in complicated environments.
With these standalone boxes, assuming 60 Hz interlaced field update rate (for NTSC video that I use), you could have up to 17 msec latency for the video digitizer (or 33 msec if it captures full frames), plus 720p output latency of another 17 msec, plus any latency added by the Rift control box. Unless there are extra internal processing steps that add more latency, these times are "up to" those delays (depending on synchronization offset between input and output signals). In any case, the total latency should be well below human reaction time (typically 200 to 300 msec depending on state of awareness).

How much caffeine you had recently may have more of an affect on your piloting skills than hardware latencies.

Using head tracking can still be useful to minimize motion sickness. If you use a RasPi, you could use the Rift head tracking information to pan and tilt the virtual image coming from the FPV camera, similar to what is done in the video shown here (except from a front row center seat point of view):
Oculus Virtual Lounge
viewtopic.php?f=140&t=15411&start=180#p98922

_________________
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. Image


Last edited by geekmaster on Tue Feb 19, 2013 2:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.



Tue Feb 19, 2013 2:07 pm
Profile
Certif-Eyable!
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 9:10 am
Posts: 1057
Location: Germany
Reply with quote
Grix wrote:
I also wonder if the gopro FOV is enough of a fisheye lens on it's own..


"The HERO3's reduced-distortion, 6-element aspherical lens combines with user-selectable Ultra-wide, Medium and Narrow field-of-views to deliver more perspective-capture options than ever before."

I think it was 170° if you got the right one.

_________________
want to demo the Rift or check it out? click here


Tue Feb 19, 2013 2:09 pm
Profile WWW
Petrif-Eyed
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 10:47 pm
Posts: 2708
Reply with quote
Even watching raw fisheye FPV video shown at youtube or vimeo shows that the aircraft should still be quite controllable depending on your flying skill, and a skilled pilot can certainly adapt to his choice of lenses.

The Rift stretches that fisheye perspective (depending on lens FoV) mostly back to "normal" anyway, making it even "more correct" than watching fisheye video on a video monitor or "old school" HMD.

_________________
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. Image


Tue Feb 19, 2013 2:22 pm
Profile
Certif-Eyable!
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 9:10 am
Posts: 1057
Location: Germany
Reply with quote
It should be easy to build a flexible "defisheye" that allows you to adopt to any Fisheye - you might loose some (FOV > Rift) or have some black borders (FOV < Rift), but you should be able to get a correct picture.

_________________
want to demo the Rift or check it out? click here


Tue Feb 19, 2013 2:31 pm
Profile WWW
Petrif-Eyed
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 10:47 pm
Posts: 2708
Reply with quote
GeraldT wrote:
It should be easy to build a flexible "defisheye" that allows you to adopt to any Fisheye - you might loose some (FOV > Rift) or have some black borders (FOV < Rift), but you should be able to get a correct picture.
"Correct" is subjective. Even convex sideview mirrors on automobiles give some degree of fisheye distortion, and the increased virtual FoV increases safety at the expense of a "correct picture". I think FPV flying also benefits from the increased FoV even with the added fisheye distortion, or it would not be so popular.

Using a Rift for FPV would automagically give you less distortion than a flat monitor, when viewing fisheye video, and because the increased FoV is more important, why bother trying to correct it with expensive "defisheye" optics?

Where in the optical or electronics path between the camera and the Rift would you put that "defisheye" lens anyway? Perhaps better to do fisheye to Rift-warp conversion in software, I think...

_________________
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. Image


Tue Feb 19, 2013 2:40 pm
Profile
Certif-Eyable!
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 9:10 am
Posts: 1057
Location: Germany
Reply with quote
I was talking about doing it in software ... we software engineers tend to do that without specifying it.

Using software should allow for a lot of different options ... like correcting the center while keeping "extra fov" at the borders in a squeezed sideview mirror way.

_________________
want to demo the Rift or check it out? click here


Tue Feb 19, 2013 3:31 pm
Profile WWW
Petrif-Eyed
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 10:47 pm
Posts: 2708
Reply with quote
GeraldT wrote:
I was talking about doing it in software ... we software engineers tend to do that without specifying it.

Using software should allow for a lot of different options ... like correcting the center while keeping "extra fov" at the borders in a squeezed sideview mirror way.
We "senior systems development engineers" have to keep moving functionality back and forth between software and hardware depending on project requirements regarding size, cost, speed, and power consumption. And when using an FPGA, the line between software and hardware can get a little blurry... :D

Software "fractional pixel displacement mapping" can do all manner of video warping with minimal code to drive it. I even did it back in the early 90's (at lower resolutions), so it could certainly be done on a RasPi that is "super fast" by comparison. But then again, if the consumer Rift has twice the resolution (1080p) and twice the refresh rate (120Hz), you might need a faster RasPi (or not).

For faster displacement speed at expense of image quality, you could displace full pixels or even pixel quads instead of fractional pixels. For that matter, why limit yourself with a RasPi? There are some nice little Tegra4 dev kits coming out that even have integrated GPU.

_________________
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. Image


Tue Feb 19, 2013 3:39 pm
Profile
Two Eyed Hopeful

Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2013 4:01 pm
Posts: 68
Reply with quote
geekmaster wrote:
GeraldT wrote:

Software "fractional pixel displacement mapping" can do all manner of video warping with minimal code to drive it. I even did it back in the early 90's (at lower resolutions), so it could certainly be done on a RasPi that is "super fast" by comparison. But then again, if the consumer Rift has twice the resolution (1080p) and twice the refresh rate (120Hz), you might need a faster RasPi (or not).

For faster displacement speed at expense of image quality, you could displace full pixels or even pixel quads instead of fractional pixels. For that matter, why limit yourself with a RasPi? There are some nice little Tegra4 dev kits coming out that even have integrated GPU.


If we are strictly speaking about FPV here, those kind of resolutions are not possible as of now anyways, the radio system can transmit at most around 420-460 lines.


Tue Feb 19, 2013 4:25 pm
Profile
Petrif-Eyed
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 10:47 pm
Posts: 2708
Reply with quote
Grix wrote:
If we are strictly speaking about FPV here, those kind of resolutions are not possible as of now anyways, the radio system can transmit at most around 420-460 lines.
That is the INPUT resolution. It still must be stretched onto whatever resolution is supported by the Rift, requiring that all of those OUTPUT pixels be processed.

Also, you mis-attributed your embedded quote. The quoted content was originally from my post.

If you do not mind the reduced FoV, you could use wireless Fatshark FPV goggles instead of a Rift, which is not particularly relevant to this thread. Interestingly, the new model Fatshark advertises "all new glass optics with a NARROWER Field of View". Is narrow FoV a GOOD thing for FPV? If so, why are so many people switching to fisheye optics?

_________________
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. Image


Tue Feb 19, 2013 5:34 pm
Profile
Certif-Eyable!
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 9:10 am
Posts: 1057
Location: Germany
Reply with quote
But you could do the processing on the input and then scale to make it less demanding! But these are really the lower hurdles, Grix is right - getting the image in that resolution back to the Oculus is what counts. I guess you don't necessary want head movement too - because without it you won't notice the lag that much (until the day you want to rise right over that church in the last moment or playing chicken with a friend ^^).

And yeah - don't put words in my mouth I hardly understand Grix ;)

_________________
want to demo the Rift or check it out? click here


Tue Feb 19, 2013 5:56 pm
Profile WWW
Golden Eyed Wiseman! (or woman!)

Joined: Fri Aug 21, 2009 9:06 pm
Posts: 1644
Reply with quote
All of the onscreen display info for many FPV rigs is in the corners, so they need it to be clear and easy to see. That said, they still want the size of the captured scene to be as large as possible.


Tue Feb 19, 2013 7:31 pm
Profile
Petrif-Eyed
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 10:47 pm
Posts: 2708
Reply with quote
PalmerTech wrote:
All of the onscreen display info for many FPV rigs is in the corners, so they need it to be clear and easy to see. That said, they still want the size of the captured scene to be as large as possible.
That is part of why I suggested earlier in this thread that you could use something like this:
Oculus Virtual Lounge
viewtopic.php?f=140&t=15411&start=180#p98922
to position the FPV image inside the Rift FoV, perhaps kept stationary to the world with head tracking while your head bobs around a bit. I am not sure if that would prevent motion sickness, but it would allow you to move your head to push the Rift screen center over the OSD data you wish to view.

_________________
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. Image


Tue Feb 19, 2013 8:57 pm
Profile
Two Eyed Hopeful

Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2013 4:01 pm
Posts: 68
Reply with quote
PalmerTech wrote:
All of the onscreen display info for many FPV rigs is in the corners, so they need it to be clear and easy to see. That said, they still want the size of the captured scene to be as large as possible.


Do you think the text/data would be impossible or just kinda inconvenient to read? Would it be warped a lot due to the optics?


Sun Mar 03, 2013 8:03 am
Profile
Petrif-Eyed
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 10:47 pm
Posts: 2708
Reply with quote
geekmaster wrote:
Grix wrote:
Bump..

I did some searching and I found these two thingies. If I run the signal through both of these, with the 3d converter set to side by side and lowest possible depth, would that work? Would there be any notable latency? Does anyone have experience with these sort of converters?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/280993783685
http://www.ebay.com/itm/170976138135
Thanks for these links!

They look like they should work fine (if a fisheye lens provides adequate pre-warp for your needs). The pair should make a nice compact low-power solution to get RCA video into a Rift. I just ordered one of each.

There are people working on getting an EasyCAP USB TV/Video Capture device ($6.59 on eBay) working on a Raspberry Pi, but I did not see any success reports yet. So for now, these devices should be a "plug and play" standalone solution that should work well for FPV. Perhaps when a RasPi solution is ready, a Rift pre-warp filter could be added, and it should also be a bit less expensive than these standalone devices.
My "analog video to HDMI" converter arrived yesterday. It has a small switch on the side that selects 1080p30 or 720p60. Both resolution work well enough. It claims support most common analog video signals, including multiple versions of NTSC/PAL/SECAM.

It could be improved in its handling of NTSC "dot crawl" on saturated portions of the video (specifically colored OSD text and graphics). I have just discovered that my cheap fisheye "backup cameras" for automotive use put out a mirror image, and but that means I could embed the camera inside the fuselage and use a pop up mirror (perhaps a small round dental mirror) with it...

My plans are to use this converter box to feed analog video to my Rift. I wonder if it run runs Linux...

_________________
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. Image


Sun Mar 03, 2013 10:10 am
Profile
Certif-Eyable!
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2007 3:38 am
Posts: 990
Reply with quote
@geekmaster - you'll have to let us know how it goes. I'm looking at getting two of these and tying the FSIN of one to VS of the other, then use an arduino to just alternately clamp the output from ont or the other halfway through each hsync, giving a split image:
http://www.fpvhobby.com/51-u-can-do-ov7950-camera.html
http://www.trulydisplays.com/ccm/specs/ ... OV7950.pdf

I know the image is likely to be stretched when it gets into the rift, but I think that with wide-angle lens offset from the center of the sensor, should be able to almost match the rift for distortion. What do you think?


Sun Mar 03, 2013 10:01 pm
Profile
Petrif-Eyed
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 10:47 pm
Posts: 2708
Reply with quote
android78 wrote:
@geekmaster - you'll have to let us know how it goes. I'm looking at getting two of these and tying the FSIN of one to VS of the other, then use an arduino to just alternately clamp the output from ont or the other halfway through each hsync, giving a split image:
http://www.fpvhobby.com/51-u-can-do-ov7950-camera.html
http://www.trulydisplays.com/ccm/specs/ ... OV7950.pdf

I know the image is likely to be stretched when it gets into the rift, but I think that with wide-angle lens offset from the center of the sensor, should be able to almost match the rift for distortion. What do you think?
I am not sure how to genlock those cameras, but after a quick look at the datasheet, it looks like your suggestion could work. You would need to shift the image sensor so your lens centers on the chip half you plan to used.

Now that electronics is so much cheaper than optics, it make much more sense than when I used my big old old vintage 3D c-mount lens with prisms inside it (taken from my old 3D 16mm film camera). I like your idea so MUCH better that I want to try it too.

You can get a huge stereoscopic effect while flying by moving your cameras to the outer ends of both wings. You would feel like you were leaning over a tiny landscape model, much like the opening sequence in the Jack Black 3D movie "Gulliver's Travels" (also filmed with wide camera separation).

In my case, using the fake-3d processing would give a rift-compatible image (when using my fisheye backup camera) using POST processing (on the ground). But your method would be true 3D (at the expense of two cameras and power for them), but I like it, a lot.

A quick hack though would be to use small mirrors or prisms to simulate what my old 3D lens did. Or buy something like one of these:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/control ... &A=details
Image
Quote:
This extremely compact (3.2 x 4.4 x 4") lens has a dual optical system within the diameter of the lens mount that creates stereo images from the left and right lenses, to be processed with a 3D image processing system.
What I am thinking is you might mount two small camera lenses side by side over a SINGLE camera image sensor, so they each focus on half of the image sensor. Put a divider between them to prevent hitting the other half of the sensor. I may try that too. Simple optical hack, no fancy electronics. You could cut part of the lens shell away, and glue the two halfs together. Cut off their threaded parts and glue the pair to a single treaded tube. It should work. Here is a quick mock-up from an FPV camera lens:
Attachment:
3dlens.jpg

I want to try making a 3D lens by hacking together two normal lenses, for a little FPV camera... :D


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

_________________
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. Image


Last edited by geekmaster on Sun Mar 03, 2013 10:57 pm, edited 2 times in total.



Sun Mar 03, 2013 10:26 pm
Profile
Certif-Eyable!
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2007 3:38 am
Posts: 990
Reply with quote
The two lens on single sensor could actually work ok. Focus could be tricky though. My thought is to actually reduce the distance between cameras to make the world appear supersized. Should help with sensation of speed.


Sun Mar 03, 2013 10:55 pm
Profile
Petrif-Eyed
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 10:47 pm
Posts: 2708
Reply with quote
android78 wrote:
The two lens on single sensor could actually work ok. Focus could be tricky though. My thought is to actually reduce the distance between cameras to make the world appear supersized. Should help with sensation of speed.
. From up in the air, there is not much parallax already (except for mountains and tall buildings). It would make trees look like mountains though. Far apart lenses would make trees look like pencils.

_________________
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. Image


Sun Mar 03, 2013 10:59 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 118 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Designed by STSoftware.