FreeTrack

Anybody tried this yet? It's free software that works like TrackIR. You just have to make your own LED-based head tracking apparatus. I built a preliminary 3-LED clip last night and mounted it to my headset. I haven't have chance to drive with it yet. I did hop into an rF3 in rFactor and let the AI drive while I watched. It looks like it will be really cool. The panning was pretty smooth. It was surprisingly comfortable and intuitive. After a few laps I was reflexively looking into the apex in each turn without having to think about it. I'm not sure it's an advantage at all. It's disconcerting in a simulation to have my view point change relative to the vehicle. I think I can probably drive more accurately with a fixed view. I'm going to try and get used to it just for the 'coolness' factor that it adds to the driving. On a related note, I had a chance to drive a shifter kart last week at New Castle Motorsports Park near Indianapolis. After driving simulations all winter, and getting used to the fixed field of view, it seemed strange to have that freedom that head movement allows relative to the vehicle. It really struck me because at first I didn't seem to be able to place the vehicle as accurately in the turns as I do in sims. It was immediately apparent to me that I was experiencing the difference between the fixed field of view in sims versus the freedom of viewpoint movement in real life. I'm interested to see if using FreeTrack turns out to be more like real life. Pat Dotson

On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 08:07:20 -0700 (PDT), [email hidden] wrote: > Anybody tried this yet? It's free software that works like TrackIR. > You just have to make your own LED-based head tracking apparatus. > > I built a preliminary 3-LED clip last night and mounted it to my > headset. I haven't have chance to drive with it yet. I did hop into > an rF3 in rFactor and let the AI drive while I watched. Sounds interesting. I've heard of some folks using the Wii IR receiver bar for this purpose, but I don't know if it involves FreeTrack or something else. As for simulated vs. real racing, I find fatigue after an hour or so in a kart to be the major factor influencing my "performance" as a race driver. While I work out regularly and cycle a lot, I find that it won't prepare you for your neck getting "long" and your arms starting to hurt ;-) Cheers, uwe

On Apr 23, 6:59 am, Uwe Schürkamp <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (7 lines)

> On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 08:07:20 -0700 (PDT), [email hidden] wrote: > > Anybody tried this yet?  It's free software that works like TrackIR. > > You just have to make your own LED-based head tracking apparatus. > > Sounds interesting. I've heard of some folks using the Wii IR receiver > bar for this purpose, but I don't know if it involves FreeTrack or > something else.

http://www.free-track.net/ The Freetrack organization is advertising Wii support in their next software release. That may be worth looking into. The Wii remotes are about $40 USD. I don't know how they plan to build a reciever that will pick up that signal. I had a chance to do some driving last night in rFactor. Getting used to the head tracking wasn't as bad as I expected. As long as the head tracking stayed smooth it was relatively easy to hit my marks. If I moved my head to look down at the gauges it was a little dis- orienting, but that will probably pass with time. I also did a little flying in FSX, and that was really cool too. I think head tracking is more useful for flight sims than racing sims. > As for simulated vs. real racing, I find fatigue after an hour or so > in a kart to be the major factor influencing my "performance" as a > race driver. While I work out regularly and cycle a lot, I find that > it won't prepare you for your neck getting "long" and your arms > starting to hurt ;-) Different issue, but yea. I've only really experienced significant fatigue during long indoor rental kart events though. The 'real' karting I've done is either oval karting where races are relatively short (plus yellows), or practice on road courses where I've only gone 6 to 8 laps at a time. If you own your own kart try reducing caster. It's a lot easier on the arms, and in my experience you don't need a ton of caster to go fast :) Pat Dotson

[email hidden] wrote:

Quoted text (17 lines)

> Anybody tried this yet? It's free software that works like TrackIR. > You just have to make your own LED-based head tracking apparatus. > > I built a preliminary 3-LED clip last night and mounted it to my > headset. I haven't have chance to drive with it yet. I did hop into > an rF3 in rFactor and let the AI drive while I watched. > > It looks like it will be really cool. The panning was pretty smooth. > It was surprisingly comfortable and intuitive. After a few laps I was > reflexively looking into the apex in each turn without having to think > about it. > > I'm not sure it's an advantage at all. It's disconcerting in a > simulation to have my view point change relative to the vehicle. I > think I can probably drive more accurately with a fixed view. I'm > going to try and get used to it just for the 'coolness' factor that it > adds to the driving.

How do you get round the problem that when you move your head, the natural place to look for the apex is next to the monitor, not at the monitor? Isn't that quite weird? I looked at the videos and I guess it just amplifies the head movement to give the desired result, but it's not altogether that real in the end, I think. -- Phil http://www.flickr.com/photos/tmc1979/

On Apr 23, 1:17 pm, Phil Newnham <[email hidden]> wrote: > > How do you get round the problem that when you move your head, the > natural place to look for the apex is next to the monitor, not at the > monitor? Isn't that quite weird? I looked at the videos and I guess it > just amplifies the head movement to give the desired result, but it's > not altogether that real in the end, I think. I've had to play around a lot with the response curves to find something comfortable. You can amplify the response, or make it close to reality. You can also apply dead zones and non-linear response. Control over the viewpoint movement is fairly complete. But you are right. The viewpoint changes on the monitor as you turn your head, but you still have to look toward the center of the screen. The only way past that problem is a head mounted display. (Side note: Can you believe it's going on 2010 now and there still aren't good and cheap HMD's?!? I wouldn't have believed it if you'd told me that 10 years ago). All I can say is that your mind can apparently adapt to this sort of thing. For me it seemed pretty intuitive after just a few minutes. One thing about my setup is I'm also using TH2Go. It's kind of nice to be able to approach apexes that aren't lost in or have to jump across the gap between the screens. I think the hottest ticket might be a large format LCD plus head tracking. As far as head tracking being more real or not, I've been concerned for a while about how much I rely on the relatively static location of the simulated cockpit as a gauge to hit my marks. When I got in that kart last week it was very apparent. Without the fixed frame of reference of the monitor edges it just felt wierd, and was difficult to hit marks at first. Like adapting to thing in a simulation, it only took a few laps to start feeling more at home, but there is definitely a disconnect there between real race driving and sim racing with a fixed POV. My opinion right now is that, for someone who will be doing both sim racing and real racing, a somewhat unrealistic disconnect between POV and the chassis may be more preferable than a fixed POV relative to the chassis. I need to get a lot more experience jumping back and forth between the two to know for sure. Pat Dotson UltraForce Simulations LLC http://ultraforcesim.com

"Phil Newnham" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (22 lines)

> [email hidden] wrote: >> Anybody tried this yet? It's free software that works like TrackIR. >> You just have to make your own LED-based head tracking apparatus. >> >> I built a preliminary 3-LED clip last night and mounted it to my >> headset. I haven't have chance to drive with it yet. I did hop into >> an rF3 in rFactor and let the AI drive while I watched. >> >> It looks like it will be really cool. The panning was pretty smooth. >> It was surprisingly comfortable and intuitive. After a few laps I was >> reflexively looking into the apex in each turn without having to think >> about it. >> >> I'm not sure it's an advantage at all. It's disconcerting in a >> simulation to have my view point change relative to the vehicle. I >> think I can probably drive more accurately with a fixed view. I'm >> going to try and get used to it just for the 'coolness' factor that it >> adds to the driving. > > How do you get round the problem that when you move your head, the natural > place to look for the apex is next to the monitor, not at the monitor? > Isn't that quite weird?

Not if you have a big, widescreen monitor. > Phil > > http://www.flickr.com/photos/tmc1979/

On Apr 23, 11:59 am, Uwe Schürkamp <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (12 lines)

> On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 08:07:20 -0700 (PDT), [email hidden] wrote: > > Anybody tried this yet?  It's free software that works like TrackIR. > > You just have to make your own LED-based head tracking apparatus. > > > I built a preliminary 3-LED clip last night and mounted it to my > > headset.  I haven't have chance to drive with it yet.  I did hop into > > an rF3 in rFactor and let the AI drive while I watched. > > Sounds interesting. I've heard of some folks using the Wii IR receiver > bar for this purpose, but I don't know if it involves FreeTrack or > something else. >

http://procrastineering.blogspot.com/ This guy has done a lot of stuff with the Wii remote. HTH, All the best, Ash -- http://www.siroccoracing.com

On Apr 24, 3:44 am, Ashley McConnell <[email hidden]> wrote: > > http://procrastineering.blogspot.com/ > > This guy has done a lot of stuff with the Wii remote. I didn't realize the Wii remotes are LED based. I always figured they were accelerometer based, then used some sort of wireless communication to transfer control signals. Now the Wii/Freetrack connection makes more sense. Thanks for the link. Pat Dotson

On Apr 24, 1:05 pm, [email hidden] wrote:

Quoted text (14 lines)

> On Apr 24, 3:44 am, Ashley McConnell <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > > >http://procrastineering.blogspot.com/ > > > This guy has done a lot of stuff with the Wii remote. > > I didn't realize the Wii remotes are LED based.  I always figured they > were accelerometer based, then used some sort of wireless > communication to transfer control signals.  Now the Wii/Freetrack > connection makes more sense.  Thanks for the link. > > Pat Dotson

Hi Pat, They are actually based on both. The wii remote is a camera rather than the LED emmiter. The thing on top of the TV has infrared LEDs in it. It also uses accelerometers to figure out where it is in space, it communicates with the Wii (or PC) using bluetooth. All the best, Ash

Phil Newnham wrote: > How do you get round the problem that when you move your head, the > natural place to look for the apex is next to the monitor, not at the > monitor? Isn't that quite weird? I looked at the videos and I guess it > just amplifies the head movement to give the desired result, but it's > not altogether that real in the end, I think. > My personal view is that a multi monitor setup is the most realistic allowing you to move your view whilst straight ahead remains straight ahead. It could be just me but any form of look to apex or look right/left just feels all wrong and I fly off the track! Maybe I just can't adjust to it like others have but I need a fixed point ahead and physically look around not have the viewpoint changing in front of me. Cheers Tony

On Apr 26, 5:10 am, Tony R <[email hidden]> wrote: > My personal view is that a multi monitor setup is the most realistic > allowing you to move your view whilst straight ahead remains straight ahead. Yea, you are surely right. There is no way that head tracking with a fixed monitor mirrors reality. It's still cool, but probably needs to be consigned to flight sims. I'm still wishing for good HMD's. -- Pat Dotson

[email hidden] wrote:

Quoted text (11 lines)

> I've had to play around a lot with the response curves to find > something comfortable. You can amplify the response, or make it close > to reality. You can also apply dead zones and non-linear response. > Control over the viewpoint movement is fairly complete. > > But you are right. The viewpoint changes on the monitor as you turn > your head, but you still have to look toward the center of the > screen. The only way past that problem is a head mounted display. > (Side note: Can you believe it's going on 2010 now and there still > aren't good and cheap HMD's?!? I wouldn't have believed it if you'd > told me that 10 years ago).

I've seen some guys flying model planes using a camera mounted on a gimbal, on the nose of the plane, and a head mounted VR helmet display, which seemed to work brilliantly. You're right to suggest it isn't cheap, though. For example: http://www.rc-tech.ch/web/index.php

Quoted text (16 lines)

> All I can say is that your mind can apparently adapt to this sort of > thing. For me it seemed pretty intuitive after just a few minutes. > One thing about my setup is I'm also using TH2Go. It's kind of nice > to be able to approach apexes that aren't lost in or have to jump > across the gap between the screens. I think the hottest ticket might > be a large format LCD plus head tracking. > > As far as head tracking being more real or not, I've been concerned > for a while about how much I rely on the relatively static location of > the simulated cockpit as a gauge to hit my marks. When I got in that > kart last week it was very apparent. Without the fixed frame of > reference of the monitor edges it just felt wierd, and was difficult > to hit marks at first. Like adapting to thing in a simulation, it > only took a few laps to start feeling more at home, but there is > definitely a disconnect there between real race driving and sim racing > with a fixed POV.

Unfortunately I can't afford the real world, but I know what you mean - the first example that springs to mind being the braking point on top of the hill at Watkins Glen, where you brake just after the advert board disappears from the screen :) which doesn't work in real life, I guess. -- Phil http://www.flickr.com/photos/tmc1979/

On Apr 28, 8:41 am, [email hidden] wrote:

Quoted text (11 lines)

> On Apr 26, 5:10 am, Tony R <[email hidden]> > wrote: > > Yea, you are surely right.  There is no way that head tracking with a > fixed monitor mirrors reality.  It's still cool, but probably needs to > be consigned to flight sims. > > I'm still wishing for good HMD's. > > -- > Pat Dotson

I have TrackIR and it's difficult to get used to. I've only experimented with the settings and haven't gone to full use in a virtual race car. The trouble is that it doesn't track your eye movement, but rather your head movement. So your neck/head is determining where you look on-screen. A friend of mine drives with a lot of body English, so his view bounces all around unexpectedly. I'm pretty sure that you should be able to adjust the sensitivity (it's variable through the range of movement of the head) so that looking to the apex takes a large change of head angle, and then looking further to the side to see if a car is beside you takes a smaller further angle change. Bob Simpson

On Apr 29, 10:58 am, Bob Simpson <[email hidden]> wrote: > > I'm pretty sure that you should be able to adjust the sensitivity > (it's variable through the range of movement of the head) so that > looking to the apex takes a large change of head angle, and then > looking further to the side to see if a car is beside you takes a > smaller further angle change. Freetrack (and TrackIR I expect) provide a graphical representation of the response curve for each axis of movement. So yes, you can do exactly what you decribe. You can also apply a dead zone so that you get no movement in POV while your head is near straight ahead. You can also turn off any axis completely. I'm set up for six degrees of freedom right now. For racing I turn off roll and longitudinal response. I've tried it with and without lateral and vertical response. For serious racing I'd probably only use yaw and pitch response with a large "soft" zone as Freetrack calls it, which is a non-linear response curve like Bob described. For flight sims you can turn all six axes on without much concern. It's cool to be able to lean over and look downward out of the side window. You can also sit up straighter and look down on the nose of the plane. Pat Dotson