https://community.intel.com/t5/Items-with-no-label/Short-range-performance-of-SR300-vs-D400-cameras/m-p/563478#M9536 <P>I would like to know how the SR300 and D400 cameras compare for short range applications such as face tracking?</P><P>Are the D400 cameras performing equally well/better?</P><P>Or are there any reasons to rather still keep buying the SR300 (Creative BlasterX)?</P> Thu, 25 Jan 2018 18:45:56 GMT CLeuz 2018-01-25T18:45:56Z https://community.intel.com/t5/Items-with-no-label/Short-range-performance-of-SR300-vs-D400-cameras/m-p/563478#M9536 <P>I would like to know how the SR300 and D400 cameras compare for short range applications such as face tracking?</P><P>Are the D400 cameras performing equally well/better?</P><P>Or are there any reasons to rather still keep buying the SR300 (Creative BlasterX)?</P> Thu, 25 Jan 2018 18:45:56 GMT https://community.intel.com/t5/Items-with-no-label/Short-range-performance-of-SR300-vs-D400-cameras/m-p/563478#M9536 CLeuz 2018-01-25T18:45:56Z https://community.intel.com/t5/Items-with-no-label/Short-range-performance-of-SR300-vs-D400-cameras/m-p/563479#M9537 <P>There is currently little data about face tracking with the 400 Series to make a proper comparison with the well-established SR300, as most people have used the new cameras for scanning objects and environments rather that body areas up til now. So your choices include:</P><P></P><P>1. Use the Creative BlasterX Senz3D (or the Razer Stargazer, another SR300-compatible camera) with the built-in face tracking support of one of the old Windows SDKs, preferably the '2016 R2' version for optimum stability of face tracking.</P><P></P><P>2. Use the SR300 or a 400 Series camera with the RealSense SDK 2.0 in combination with a face-tracking module on another software platform such as OpenCV.</P><P></P><P>The same options apply to hand tracking.</P> Thu, 25 Jan 2018 19:13:34 GMT https://community.intel.com/t5/Items-with-no-label/Short-range-performance-of-SR300-vs-D400-cameras/m-p/563479#M9537 MartyG 2018-01-25T19:13:34Z