<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic You can definitely improve in Software Archive</title>
    <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Software-Archive/Lamdmarks-accuracy-issues/m-p/1105725#M70408</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;You can definitely improve the depth resolution doing a more accurate calibration with your specific camera.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 10 Mar 2016 22:38:03 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>samontab</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2016-03-10T22:38:03Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Lamdmarks accuracy issues</title>
      <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Software-Archive/Lamdmarks-accuracy-issues/m-p/1105724#M70407</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;I am using SR300 face detection and tracking. In my application it's important to have accurate 3D position. The landmark positions in space are usually short by 2-4cm (SDK r5). I had some experience with the F200 system with SDK r4, and there the results were much better typically +-0.5cm. I tried also the r6 SDK but there the deviations were even larger.&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;Any ideas? Is it a camera calibration issue?&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;Thanks, Silviu.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 10 Mar 2016 11:56:28 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.intel.com/t5/Software-Archive/Lamdmarks-accuracy-issues/m-p/1105724#M70407</guid>
      <dc:creator>silviu_z_</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-03-10T11:56:28Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>You can definitely improve</title>
      <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Software-Archive/Lamdmarks-accuracy-issues/m-p/1105725#M70408</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;You can definitely improve the depth resolution doing a more accurate calibration with your specific camera.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 10 Mar 2016 22:38:03 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.intel.com/t5/Software-Archive/Lamdmarks-accuracy-issues/m-p/1105725#M70408</guid>
      <dc:creator>samontab</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-03-10T22:38:03Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Hi samontab,</title>
      <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Software-Archive/Lamdmarks-accuracy-issues/m-p/1105726#M70409</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi samontab,&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;Thanks, that's what I intend to do. I hoped that the factory calibration would be more accurate (one system has 10cm deviation at 50cm distance), but probably that's what you can get for a 100USD camera.&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;Thanks, Silviu.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Mar 2016 18:24:09 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.intel.com/t5/Software-Archive/Lamdmarks-accuracy-issues/m-p/1105726#M70409</guid>
      <dc:creator>silviu_z_</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-03-11T18:24:09Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

