Discussion of targeting technologies - Page 2 - Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community

Forum Jump: 

Discussion of targeting technologies

Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #11 of 130 (permalink) Old 07-05-2015, 11:41 PM
lololol
 
qsxcv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 4,243
Rep: 365 (Unique: 152)
http://www.photonics.philips.com/pdf/VCSEL-based_miniature_laser-Doppler_interferometer.pdf
Quote:
Pretty stable at most speeds, but at extremely low speed (0.1 mm/s) sensitivity is lower for some reason. Seems to be ADC or math error.

it's not an error. it's a limitation of the technology

the laser cavity feedback frequency is proportional to the movement speed, and the photodiode measures this signal in the laser cavity.
because pte requires the modulation scheme (see pdf above, fig2) to determine directions, it cannot accurately measure frequencies in the laser cavity below the modulation frequency.

the modulation frequency must be reasonably high in order to provide smooth and responsive tracking, because the update/sampling rate for the system is limited by it.

now let's estimate at what movement speed does the feedback frequency become problematic.

suppose a modulation frequency of 1000hz. the feedback frequency becomes problematic around this frequency.
using eq1 from the pdf
1000hz = [2 * cos(phi) / wavelength] * speed

wavelength=857nm=0.857micron
assume phi=45deg which is reasonable.

speed = 0.6mm/s

which is the same order of magnitude as the actual "low speed perfect control speed" of ~0.3mm/s in fig6 of the pdf

too busy to check forums as regularly
pm me if i forget to respond
qsxcv is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #12 of 130 (permalink) Old 07-06-2015, 01:27 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
L4dd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Katy, Texas
Posts: 677
Rep: 17 (Unique: 16)
Why would a "hard" or more uniform mousepad/surface be better than a finely woven cloth mousepad for incoherent light based sensors (3310, 3988, 3366, and others) regarding tracking other than surface depression?

The contrast of light bouncing off the levels of cloth might allow for more distinguishing features than a more uniform surface, such as a "hard" mousepad?

Glyphosate and fluoride chelate metals allowing passage of the blood-brain barrier, and glyphosate destroys gut flora and depletes minerals.
USA fluoridates, allows so much glyphosate in water, and forces vaccines of metals, MSG, polysorbate, glyphosate, and etc.
The above, pollution, alcohol, sugar, dyes, artificial flavors, electromagnetic radiation, and etc. can increase inflammation.
L4dd is offline  
post #13 of 130 (permalink) Old 07-06-2015, 04:01 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
Crizzl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 116
Rep: 5 (Unique: 5)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elrick View Post

No he's not, just read the info because he's explaining the whole concept of what a mouse does so instead of you deriding him because he didn't become THE chosen fanboy of your type of sensor.

Geez you clowns think you know how a mouse works, then you start abusing others who step up here to explain it in detail, which some should so that their concepts can be understood by the many that visit this place.

Instead of kicking someone constantly for an opposing view maybe you should try and understand were he is coming from.
What's up with the insults? Was that necessary?

I don't mind him explaining it it's actually kind of interesting but I've seen him explain it several times before around here so why keep on explaining it? He's also biased towards a certain type of sensors and if he's not explaining why it's better he's pushing for people to buy PTE sensor mice. I guess it's just another one of these users that knows what's best for everyone and is very vocal about it.
Crizzl is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #14 of 130 (permalink) Old 07-06-2015, 04:41 AM
- Insanity Beckons -
 
Elrick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 3,950
Rep: 173 (Unique: 89)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crizzl View Post

He's also biased towards a certain type of sensors and if he's not explaining why it's better he's pushing for people to buy PTE sensor mice. I guess it's just another one of these users that knows what's best for everyone and is very vocal about it.

He/she is doing alright considering English may be his/her second language here, due to their current location.

He/she also likes ball-mice hence not strictly a PTE only type of guy/girl (the net never discloses sex of person). Suspect as usual they are trying to expand their knowledge of sensors which is always good on any public forum.

I too get tired of the same agenda being preached and pushed upon everyone here and it's always good to have people questioning the status-quo. Always ask questions because it makes sense to continually chip away at the foundations of so-called monumental truths, as we currently know them.

Also please pardon my speech when I respond to people here on OCN because I work at a place that generally responds with fists and four letter words on a daily basis devil-smiley-019.gif .
Elrick is offline  
post #15 of 130 (permalink) Old 07-06-2015, 06:19 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
Atavax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,582
Rep: 64 (Unique: 50)
The problem is he thinks he knows the limitations, but he has no idea what problems engineer's have been able to minimize and which ones they haven't. And when we have an engineer working for for a mouse company tell us the pros and cons, above ignores him and calls him biased.

There is nothing wrong with above thinking pte is better. What is wrong is him misleading people into thinking he knows the current bottlenecks of each sensor type from a technical point of view, he isn't an engineer, he doesn't know what is and isn't holding them back. And we can't disprove him because we aren't engineer's either.

If he wants to compare the tracking performance in real world tests and claim pte is better, cool, all power to him. But when he implies he knows the technical limitations of each sensor type, he is a liar and a phony. If he wants to argue that pte is better he should come up with tests to prove it and post results and then others can attempt the same tests and post their results. And then people can debate what those test results prove.
Atavax is offline  
post #16 of 130 (permalink) Old 07-06-2015, 06:44 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
Pirx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 222
Rep: 7 (Unique: 7)
whatever. even if PTE is indeed more accurate (from what he's describing), still most gamers prefer plain optical image correlation sensors.
Pirx is offline  
post #17 of 130 (permalink) Old 07-06-2015, 06:52 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
Derp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 8,763
Rep: 735 (Unique: 515)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pirx View Post

whatever. even if PTE is indeed more accurate (from what he's describing), still most gamers prefer plain optical image correlation sensors.

You have no way of knowing that. The more recent PTE sensors are only in a few mice and those choices might have deal breakers related to the shape, weight or other details. I wonder if the Razer sponsored teams will try the new PTE Mamba or continue to stick with their ics Deathadders.

Derp is offline  
post #18 of 130 (permalink) Old 07-06-2015, 08:26 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
CeeSA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 920
Rep: 117 (Unique: 73)
I always was and still am a big fan of the PLN 2031. I always thougt the PLN 2031 in the Lachesis 1Gen and the Orochi 1Gen are really good implementations.
I know the lift off problem but it doesn't bother me. But I understand that is a big deal for others.

Nice to see some positive posts about the PTE Sensors. Maybe it is better than it's reputation.
CeeSA is offline  
post #19 of 130 (permalink) Old 07-06-2015, 11:20 AM - Thread Starter
New to Overclock.net
 
Above8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Russia, Moscow
Posts: 424
Rep: 40 (Unique: 34)
Quote:
Originally Posted by RDno1 View Post

Could you name a few? Would the Razer Spectre be one of them?
Razer Lachesis 3G - no path correction (out of production)
Razer Spectre - no path correction (out of production)
Razer Naga 2014 - no path correction
Mad Catz M. M. O. TE - Sensor dampening may be disabled in software
Mad Catz R. A. T. TE - Sensor dampening may be disabled in software
Quote:
Originally Posted by RDno1 View Post

Also, have you tried using a graphics tablet in an FPS? What happens if you do? I imagine there are still other disadvantages such as polling rate or input lag.
Depends on graphics tablet model and drivers. With older drivers my Wacom Intuos5 used tablet zone like rotation angles map, so if you need to rotate from 359 degrees to 1 degree, you need to place mouse to opposite side of tablet. With newer drivers it works in FPS completely different, more like analog sticks, if mouse is in the middle, character stands still, but if you place mouse in any other place, charter will rotate in this direction with fixed speed. This device was never adopted for FPS games by manufacturer, but I’m sure it could be fixed relatively easy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RDno1 View Post

Why do you not consider lower cpi on slow movements with PTE sensors a limiting factor??
Sensitivity of slow movements is lower, but sensor still can track slow movements. It’s definitely a flaw. I’ll think how to explain it more correctly and try to correct OP.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RDno1 View Post

Wouldn't ICS ideally be better if tracking could be made very stable up to unrealistic movement speeds?
ICS technology has a lot of different unfixable flaws.


Quote:
Originally Posted by qsxcv View Post

these vague statements are your opinion
I don’t think that dynamic resolution and vertical tracking may be considered as proper behavior. Maybe I should change “To work properly, any ICS must be used on hard surface.” To “This means, that any ICS should be used on hard surface to be able to work properly.”
If sensor can’t see receive 100% information about tracking surface, it has no theoretical potential to track movement 100% accurately.
Quote:
Originally Posted by qsxcv View Post

this is only true if the image projected by the lens is in very good focus, and if there is significant high frequency detail
You can’t increase amount of information by removing focus. You can make initial image unfocused, blury and smooth, by this you’ll hide details/noise but at the same time you will make information (and tracking) less accurate. It won’t change main point.

Less contrast, but main point is still the same. If I'll reduce contrast in my examples result will be similiar.
Quote:
Originally Posted by qsxcv View Post

here are real images of what an ics sensor (3366, led) sees
If they are real examples of sensor signal, I’d like to place them in OP.
By the way, which surface is it?


Quote:
Originally Posted by SmashTV View Post

Cool, another "optical is wholly inaccurate" thread in disguise.
There is nothing to disguise.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Crizzl View Post

Why do you keep posting about this "optical sucks PTE rocks" thing? Do you have some sort of hidden agenda?
Well, if you look closely, it’s more about: “ICS sucks, PTE sucks a less, graphics tablets could rock if they had better realization”.


Quote:
Originally Posted by qsxcv View Post

well it's clear that he's extremely biased against ics sensors.
There is more information about ICS than about other sensors, because even though their operating principle could look simple and obvious, there are a lot of unobvious details that aren’t usually noted.

By the way, it's too difficult to be a human and to be unbiased simultaneously.
Quote:
Originally Posted by qsxcv View Post

quite of bit of stuff is vague/inaccurate/misleading
If you see inaccuracy, please let me know, I’d like to eliminate it.


Quote:
Originally Posted by qsxcv View Post

it's not an error. it's a limitation of the technology
Thank you for correction, I’ll correct OP soon.


Quote:
Originally Posted by L4dd View Post

Why would a "hard" or more uniform mousepad/surface be better than a finely woven cloth mousepad for incoherent light based sensors (3310, 3988, 3366, and others) regarding tracking other than surface depression?

The contrast of light bouncing off the levels of cloth might allow for more distinguishing features than a more uniform surface, such as a "hard" mousepad?
All my mice in all my tests performed better on Manticor, than on QCK. I guess cloth has very rough texture. A lot of smaller and larger details. Small details may result high frequency noise. Larger details may cast shadows.

By the way, I've ordered digital microscope, so I'll have a chance to look at it "closer" soon.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Crizzl View Post

He's also biased towards a certain type of sensors and if he's not explaining why it's better he's pushing for people to buy PTE sensor mice.
If I’ll tell you that jet is faster than helicopter, will it mean that I push you to buy a jet?
If I’ll explain difference between LCD and OLED, will it mean that I push you to buy OLED?
If I’ll tell you that OLED has better contrast and input lag than any LCD, will it be biased?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crizzl View Post

I guess it's just another one of these users that knows what's best for everyone and is very vocal about it.
If I explain difference between technologies, it doesn’t mean I say what’s best for you.
Graphics tablets have best/perfect accuracy, does it mean they will be better for everyone? Especially in their current state. Especially with current price.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Elrick View Post

He/she
He

Quote:
Originally Posted by Atavax View Post

The problem is he thinks he knows the limitations
I don't think I know, I only show facts, logics and conclusions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atavax View Post

And when we have an engineer working for for a mouse company tell us the pros and cons, above ignores him and calls him biased.
How can be “an engineer working for a mouse company” not biased?
What do you prefer to believe, logics or groundless statements of that engineer?
Which of my statements are groundless?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atavax View Post

There is nothing wrong with above thinking pte is better. What is wrong is him misleading people into thinking he knows the current bottlenecks of each sensor type from a technical point of view, he isn't an engineer, he doesn't know what is and isn't holding them back. And we can't disprove him because we aren't engineer's either.

If he wants to compare the tracking performance in real world tests and claim pte is better, cool, all power to him. But when he implies he knows the technical limitations of each sensor type, he is a liar and a phony. If he wants to argue that pte is better he should come up with tests to prove it and post results and then others can attempt the same tests and post their results. And then people can debate what those test results prove.
I have no special equipment, so I don't know which reproducible tests I can make. But I can speak about theory. Test results without theoretical grounding are useless anyway.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Pirx View Post

whatever. even if PTE is indeed more accurate (from what he's describing), still most gamers prefer plain optical image correlation sensors.
It’s called stagnation. If everyone will only do what majority does, there will be no progress, we’ll get stuck with it, as we already did with ICS. By doing something, only because someone else does it, you won’t be able to move forward.

Well, maybe you don’t like PTE for some reason, ok. But it doesn’t remove mechanical problems of ball mice and doesn’t make ICS accurate. If all sensors are bad, we need to improve graphics tablets and stuff like that. But not ICS. ICS “progress” is going nowhere. It’ll never be accurate, because it can’t be accurate even in theory.
Above8 is offline  
post #20 of 130 (permalink) Old 07-06-2015, 11:46 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
Atavax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,582
Rep: 64 (Unique: 50)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Above8 View Post

I don't think I know, I only show facts, logics and conclusions.
How can be “an engineer working for a mouse company” not biased?
What do you prefer to believe, logics or groundless statements of that engineer?
Which of my statements are groundless?
I have no special equipment, so I don't know which reproducible tests I can make. But I can speak about theory. Test results without theoretical grounding are useless anyway.
It’s called stagnation. If everyone will only do what majority does, there will be no progress, we’ll get stuck with it, as we already did with ICS. By doing something, only because someone else does it, you won’t be able to move forward.

In a previous thread, it has been shown that many of your "facts" we're false.

Every human is biased, but you discounted his superior knowledge because his conclusions didn't match your interpretation of data from a paper. You aren't seeking the truth, you are seeking people to confirm your theory. Anyone that disagrees with you, you can selectively ignore and called biased, like Morrier. Or you can ignore context, like when you claimed Ino said pte was more accurate when he only said that at high dpi it performs better. A paper written by the sole manufacturer of pte with all its patents that would be useless if if pte is proven inferior is somehow less biased than the engineer that has experience designing mice with both kinds of sensors because the engineer doesn't confirm the view you are looking to get confirmed and the paper does. The only progress you're interested in is furthering your religion built on pte. Not in improving mouse sensor performance.
Atavax is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off