Augmented Reality with Open Source Software

Open Source AR Software
Business Case DirectFactory

Andreas Hartmann: Open Source AR Software – Business Case DirectFactory 2011-05-31 1

BeCompany – About Us

Head office in Zurich
Independent integrator
Technology evaluation, focus on new technologies
Consulting, implementation, support
Specialized in open source technologies
Swiss Post solution provider:
DirectFactory and other web applications


DirectFactory & AR: Requirements

DirectFactory as tool for AR campaigns
Allow users to create/import 3D scenes
Use postcards as advertisement and
carrier/interaction medium
Personalization (text/other possibilities)
AR platforms: Desktop, iOS, Android


Marker-based AR
Video
Tracking

3D Model
3D Processing
Marker position
in 3D space

Camera position
for rendering Textures
Composition

3D Rendering
& Animation Animation


Business Case DirectFactory

Step 1: Technology Evaluation
Step 2: Prototype
Step 3: Pilot



Technologies (open & closed source)
Technical requirements & conditions
Legal conditions (licensing)
Options & capabilities (supported content &
markers, quality, reliability, personalization, …)



Closed Source Vendors
High quality showcases
Cross-platform solutions
No out-of-the-box personalization capability
Core customization requires cooperation with
vendor


Open Source Vendors
Lack of high-quality showcases
Projects focusing on single platforms, driven by
individual use cases, not market penetration
Small core development communities
Large supply of knowledgeable developers for
individual platforms, but not across platforms
Low initial costs

Open Source Marker-Based AR Platforms
Runtime
Hardware Operating System Video Tracking 3D Rendering
Environment

Away3D
Flash FLARToolKit
Papervision3D
Windows,
Desktop
Mac OS
Silverlight 5 3D
Silverlight SLARToolKit
Balder

Native OpenSceneGraph
iOS ARToolKit for iOS
(Objective C) (OpenGL)

Android Native (Java) ARToolKit/AndAR OpenGL
Mobile

Native (C#) /
Windows Phone Mango / SLARToolKit Native (C#)
Silverlight


Flash vs. Silverlight

Flash

Nov '10 - Apr '11
Source: statowl.com

Silverlight


Decision: Flash + FLARToolKit

Based on proven ARToolKit algorithms
Large supply of knowledgeable developers
Dual license (GPL for non-commercial use)
Supports multiple 3D engines:
Papervision3D, Away3D, Sandy, Alternativa3D
Marker: simple geometric forms, asymmetric


Step 2: Prototype

Goals

Proof of concept: Integration DF & AR
Basic technical capabilities & limitations
Basic project workflow


Step 2: Desktop Prototype
Lessons learned during Implementation
Easy integration of DF personalization service
(objects rendered independent from 3D scene)
Very fast implementation
Postcard feasible as marker carrier
No no-go criteria found
But: no anmiation yet – critical!


Step 3: Pilot
Goals
Reality check, verify assumptions
Actual implementation cost & complexity
3D model & anmiation workflow
Acceptance, understanding by recipients
Real-world technical limitations (webcam, …)


Limitations
& Conclusion


Technical Limitations

AR solutions still in early development stage:
„Peak of Inflated Expectations“ (Gartner)
No cross-platform runtime environment
(except proprietary plug-ins)
Flash usability problems:
Browser window size bug on Firefox Mac,
Keyboard focus


Handling Limitations

Users not familiar with AR applications
Webcam not available in older computers
Rigid lenses (notebooks) can impede handling
for some applications
Consideration: Alternative content for users
without webcam


3D Scene Limitations
Existing standards (OpenGL) not consistently
available across platforms
No universal standard for 3D scenes
(3D modelling -> 3D rendering):
Built in Cinema4D, problems importing in Away3D
Generic application + arbitrary pluggable 3D scenes
very hard to achieve („AR scene library“)
Close cooperation between designer and AR/Flash
developer necessary


Rendering Performance Limitations

3D Rendering Flash Stage3D
Flash („Molehill“)

DirectX 9,
zzzz…
OpenGL 1.3,
OpenGL ES 2.0

„Future version of
Flash Player“
CPU GPU

Marker Limitations
Black & white
Simple, asymmetric shape (orientation
detection)
Size approx. 10 x 10 cm
Surface not shiny (postcard varnishing!)
Rigid carrier material to ensure that the
marker stays flat


Personalization Limitations
Personalization of 3D scene problematic
(personalized objects separate from 3D scene)
Marker-based personalization not possible with
ARToolKit
Alphanumeric code: cumbersome, risk of typing
errors
Visual code (QR): additional visual marker could
be confusing


Conclusion – as things are now :)

Many technical problems not related to AR itself
Multiple components with individual limitations
involved, incompatibilities
Technical limitations dictate conceptual & functional
possibilities – „function follows form“
Easy implementation, low initial costs
Realization in short timeframe possible
Be aware of non-technical limitations
(appeal, handling, usability, guidance)

When to Use Closed Source

High quality requirements
Complex 3D scenes (many polygons)
Image (e.g. photo) as marker
Support for multiple platforms (desktop, mobile)


When to Use Open Source
Low initial costs
Low quality/complexity requirements
(3D scene, marker)
Short time-to-market
Single target platform
(desktop or particular mobile platform)
Customizability (personalization, integration in
other services, …)


The End
Thank you for your attention!


Augmented Reality with Open Source Software

More Related Content

What's hot

Viewers also liked

Similar to Augmented Reality with Open Source Software

More from nobby

Recently uploaded

Augmented Reality with Open Source Software