Home Forums Eye Tracking Devices EyeX vs. ITU Gaze Tracker Reply To: EyeX vs. ITU Gaze Tracker

Matt Chambers

Great. Thanks for the answers. That is a great and very informative link. Please add it to the main EyeX website (i.e. “How It Works”). Also, it’s apparently impossible to get from the main Tobii website to the EyeX website. Perhaps that is intentional (you don’t want researchers opting for the cheaper EyeX) :).

Do you think the hardware is already sufficient to allow software improvements to achieve sub-degree precision, or will further hardware iterations be needed as well (similar to the Oculus Rift)? Are the “microprojectors” (I assume these are IR LEDs?) far enough away from the camera? I figured that the farther away they are from the camera, the easier it is to get information from all 3 points (the pupil and both reflections).

AFAIK, you can’t do good 6DoF head tracking with only two points (the eyes). You have to get at least another point. How about an IR-reflector that sticks to the forehead or on a hat? I’d love for Tobii to knock Natural Point off its de facto monopoly on head tracking. The EyeX dev kit is already cheaper. The market needs some competition from a company that isn’t scared of their patent trolling FUD tactics. In the short term, since you are using IR, all you need to do is support integrating FreeTrack by letting it use your hardware. Then you’re REALLY close to a product that will have twice the functionality of TrackIR. Later you can integrate the algorithm they use into your own software and support both functions seamlessly.