Talk:Motion capture

message: 1/19/2009: Ironically I wrote the original Active Marker System paragraph, since I work for PhaseSpace and it got changed by Vicon and other companies to water down any reference to the company. I also wrote most of the segments in this article that have to do with technology rather than companies, and movies, and no one complains about those paragraphs. This includes the Active Marker, Magnetics, Passive Marker, RF and other sections. Every time I try to make this a level playing field it starts another Wiki War. This whole article needs to be re-written by someone with no bias, rather than just differing bias. Tmcsheery (talk) 20:08, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Marketing department

message: The target of the link to the world records of motion capture has been usurped by WikiSpammers -- an amazing daily rate of edits, and no apparent way to restore a sufficiently-old page to restore sanity even momentarily. Judging by the varying content, it may even be competing spammers.
I was able to navigate to a good page by clicking on the Home tab on the target Wiki, and then World Records tab. But I'm afraid that if I were to update the link on this page, it would lead to the good page being spammed instead, if it were being found due to being linked from here.
Now, these folks at the Motion Capture Society somewhat deserve what they get for running their Wiki so poorly, but I'm not eager to cause them more grief, nor am I eager to remove a link to an otherwise good (if small) site (better than all these commercial links), and yet the link as it is does not serve the reader.
For now, I'm going to annotate the link. I hope someone has a better idea. I hope the people behind the Motion Capture Society get their Wiki act together and block these spammers...
Bob Kerns (talk) 18:23, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spammed Link, What to do? 

message: My feeling is this article should be about motion capture technology and not the use, i.e. the process of digitally capturing real life motion data.  Performance capture is an application of motion capture, as gait analysis in biomechanics, as is tracking an object to shoot it down by the military, as is a camera watching an assembly line so a robot can pick it up, etc.  I think all the applications should be separate articles, and this article should cover the various technologies and methods, not the implementation by application or industry (save for the other articles).  --Peeldog 03:55, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  More Merge Talk 

message: It seems to me that the External Links entirely consist of companies supplying mocap products or services — is this in keeping with Wikipedia policy?
--OldCommentator 16:13, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Advertising?!?

message: *Merge: Absolutely merge. Performance capture is not new nor is it unique. It is motion capture. Very unprofessional marketing from Image Metrics and Phase Space.
*Merge: Extensive article on Motion capture covers the topic nicely. Performance capture is essentially the same thing (with facial capture added).
*I agree completely. In the film industry we use motion capture technology to capture a performance. It makes no difference if points are added to the face; it’s still mocap. This should be folded into the Motion capture article. --OldCommentator 00:47, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: True, in the early days of "mocap" (as it's now more commonly known), only gross motor movements were captured. As the technology progessed it became possible to capture ever higher resolution spatial data, including finger movements and facial expression. We now routinely output the motion data in real time. On the television show I'm currently on, a director directs two motion-actors while watching their CGI characters interact in real-time on the monitor.--OldCommentator 00:21, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Also, don't forget to sign your comments.--OldCommentator 00:21, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge with 'Performance capture'

message: The beginning of the Motion Capture article explains a brief history of Motion Capture in the 70s and 80s.  Later in the article there is a section entitled history, where it looks like several different people are trying to claim inventors rights to motion capture in the 80s and 90s.  I think that the second history section should be deleted, save for the bit about the Sinbad movie.  Comments?
007patrick 01:56, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  History? 

message: Instead of being called Motion capture, it should be called Performance capture. Motion capture is the original and more primitive version of performance capture, which is much more sophisticated. Actors act, they just don't move, which means it is their performance which is captured, not simply their motions. 193.217.195.123 12:16, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: This article should change its name

message: so stop printing it's definitely going to be expensive; e.g. free software potential and hand made tools.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leladax (talk • contribs) 21:43, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  the cost can be potentially almost 0 

message: There is plenty of text here and just 2 references that probably will not pass WP:Reliable. But the text is not useless, and needs clean up etc. Does anyone here have deep expertise in this field? Else I may work on this gradually. History2007 (talk) 13:26, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Article quality

message: Except for a fleeting mention in reference to games, there is nothing on the history of this technique.  Can someone please tell us when it was first used, when it was first used in various other fields (e.g., sports, medicine, movies), and how it developed.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.225.30.91 (talk) 12:07, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. This timeline from the Motion Capture Society provides some good markers, many of which are entirely absent from the wiki article: http://www.motioncapturesociety.com/resources/industry-history --173.233.174.234 (talk) 09:47, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  History lacking 

message: What about an ultrasound analogy to RF positioning? Is it possible, or maybe ultrasound can't pass through body in the best way, or is it bad for health? Or is it completely possible and highly precise?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.221.56.166 (talk) 10:05, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ultrasound positioning 

message: I added a merge tag to suggest Optical motion tracking to be merged to this article, specifically to the section "Markerless motion tracking". That section contains only one paragraph and could be expanded with the info on the other article, which i.m.o. doesn't warrant a separate page. Thoughts? --Waldir talk 13:00, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like a good plan to me. HCA (talk) 16:02, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Support. Looks also good to me. --Fluffystar (talk) 14:39, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

text: I support merging. --134.109.240.28 (talk) 18:15, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge from Optical motion tracking 

message: Hi.  I'm guessing that the statement "Movement that does not follow the laws of physics generally cannot be captured" is in reference to some specific situation that I'm unable to visualize.  I completely agree with it, with the exception of using the word "generally"...versus 'certainly', or omitting it.  I apologize for being pedantic, but without any further explanation on it, I see no need for this statement.  The reason being, movement not following the laws of physics cannot exist (offscreen), so it's implicit that it cannot be captured.
Mouthematician (talk) 00:34, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wording in "Disadvantages" 

message: There is an enormous amount of original research and POV in this article, especially with qualitative claims and a list of advantages v. disadvantages, which should not lead the article body. The field isn't one I know well and I leave it to other editors with more expertise, but Wikipedia policies and guidelines I do know, and this article had numerous issues in that regard. I post this by way of explaining my edits and tags today.--Tenebrae (talk) 19:38, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I fail to see what is non-neutral POV.  There doesn't appear to be a discussion on this talk page about neutrality.  There should probably be more citations and references, but on the whole, to me, the article appears pretty helpful.  So please cite the specific sections that have POV disputed, or else please remove the comment as per rules on NPOVD tags. --80.7.96.98 (talk) 00:17, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  NPOV tag removed, according to policy undr rules on NPOVD tags  (talk) 06:32, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: POV

message: The section "Underwater Motion Capture System" reads like an advertisement. And it doesn't add much to the general technique of motion capturing. It doesn't say how problems concerning change in optical transmission under water were tackled. I suggest to remove this section all together.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frodo Muijzer (talk • contribs) 09:34, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Underwater Motion Capture System" seems like a copy/paste from a promo website 

message: The comment under "Applications" about Snow White is redundant since comparisons with rotoscoping were covered in the lede. To identify a use of rotoscoping as de facto a form of motion capture is wrong and misunderstands how the two techniques work, despite the similarities (i.e. taking real world physical performances and converting them to animation). I have removed it. Verlaine76 (talk) 17:23, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed snow white section. 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Motion capture. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140703113656/http://www.nycastings.com/dmxreadyv2/blogmanager/v3_blogmanager.asp?post=motioncaptureactors to http://www.nycastings.com/dmxreadyv2/blogmanager/v3_blogmanager.asp?post=motioncaptureactors
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091213053756/http://radoff.com/blog/2008/08/22/anatomy-of-an-mmorpg/ to http://radoff.com/blog/2008/08/22/anatomy-of-an-mmorpg/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:27, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: User kolsevska has edited some of the page to include information about 'Husky Sense', even going as far as changing the 'estimated cost' for a mocap suit to match the one Husky Sense alleges. The modification was also done around the time they stated advertising their product (not to mention the user kolsekova itself was created seemingly only for this modification). This seems to me like a case of editing in self interest or with advertising purposes and I don't think it aligns with Wikipedia's standards. If it is worth mentioning then it belongs in a list of examples, not as the one depicted on top of the article (However, I don't think anyone with relation to the product should be the one to do it). Reading some of the topics in the talk tab makes me think this isnt the first time this has happened. But I'd rather see a more industry standard representation of mocap than one that to my knowledge was released early this year. SP Jacob (talk) 14:38, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  More advertising going on