Since the advent of the first Kinect as motion controller device for the Microsoft XBOX platform (November 2010), several similar active and low-cost range sensing devices have been introduced on the mass-market for several purposes, including gesture based interfaces, 3D multimedia interaction, robot navigation, finger tracking, 3D body scanning for garment design and proximity sensors for automotive. However, given their capability to generate a real time stream of range images, these has been used in some projects also as general purpose range devices, with performances that for some applications might be satisfying. This paper shows the working principle of the various devices, analyzing them in terms of systematic errors and random errors for exploring the applicability of them in standard 3D capturing problems. Five actual devices have been tested featuring three different technologies: i) Kinect V1 by Microsoft, Structure Sensor by Occipital, and Xtion PRO by ASUS, all based on different implementations of the Primesense sensor; ii) F200 by Intel/Creative, implementing the Realsense pattern projection technology; Kinect V2 by Microsoft, equipped with the Canesta TOF Camera. A critical analysis of the results tries first of all to compare them, and secondarily to focus the range of applications for which such devices could actually work as a viable solution.

3D capturing performances of low-cost range sensors for mass-market applications

GUIDI, GABRIELE;GONIZZI BARSANTI, SARA;MICOLI, LAURA LOREDANA
2016

Abstract

Since the advent of the first Kinect as motion controller device for the Microsoft XBOX platform (November 2010), several similar active and low-cost range sensing devices have been introduced on the mass-market for several purposes, including gesture based interfaces, 3D multimedia interaction, robot navigation, finger tracking, 3D body scanning for garment design and proximity sensors for automotive. However, given their capability to generate a real time stream of range images, these has been used in some projects also as general purpose range devices, with performances that for some applications might be satisfying. This paper shows the working principle of the various devices, analyzing them in terms of systematic errors and random errors for exploring the applicability of them in standard 3D capturing problems. Five actual devices have been tested featuring three different technologies: i) Kinect V1 by Microsoft, Structure Sensor by Occipital, and Xtion PRO by ASUS, all based on different implementations of the Primesense sensor; ii) F200 by Intel/Creative, implementing the Realsense pattern projection technology; Kinect V2 by Microsoft, equipped with the Canesta TOF Camera. A critical analysis of the results tries first of all to compare them, and secondarily to focus the range of applications for which such devices could actually work as a viable solution.
International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences - ISPRS Archives
3D metrology; Low-cost 3d sensors; Random error; Resolution; Systematic error; Information Systems; Geography, Planning and Development
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
isprs-archives-XLI-B5-33-2016.pdf

accesso aperto

Descrizione: Articolo finale
: Publisher’s version
Dimensione 2.37 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
2.37 MB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: http://hdl.handle.net/11311/1023240
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 16
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 12
social impact