[PD] Sensors

[Josh Steiner]

there is even a "gamers mouse" with 2000dpi:

http://www.gamesdomain.com/gdreview/zones/reviews/pc/jan01/razerrev.html

gotta love its name too ... the "Razer Boomslang 2000"

-josh

Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:

>Actually, USB mice can have quite good resolution and sampling rates.  The
>problem is the OS drivers limit the resolution to screen pixels but
>there are tricks to get around that.  I think the sampling rates are on
>the order of 1-5 khz with a resolution of 400-800 pixels per inch.
>
>http://www.semiconductor.agilent.com/cgi-bin/morpheus/home/home.jsp?pSection=Optical+Navigation
>
>.hc
>
>On Fri, 31 Oct 2003, matthew jones wrote:
>
>  
>
>>I really don't understand why people are so hooked up on using MIDI or
>>serial/parallel ports for interfacing sensors with pd.  It strikes me that
>>the absolute best way if you are at all worried about sample
>>rate/quantisation amount is to use the audio signal inputs of your
>>soundcard.  some simple circuitry and then you have maybe a 96kHz 24bit
>>input - super fast control and with same latency!
>>
>>am I mistaken? has anyone used this to good effect?  I was thinking that the
>>terminatorX style turntable things are a prime example of where a mouse just
>>doesn't offer enough resolution to do even a half decent job....
>>
>>
>>matt
>>
>>-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>>http://www.loopit.org/
>>-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "Marc Lavallée" <odradek at videotron.ca>
>>To: <pd-list at iem.at>
>>Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 2:01 PM
>>Subject: Re: [PD] Sensors
>>
>>
>>    
>>
>>>On Fri, Oct 31, 2003 at 09:25:34PM +0800, Chris McCormick wrote:
>>>      
>>>
>>>>An idea I had recently (though I'm sure it's not original) is to hook up
>>>>8 555-timer circuits with variable resistors to the parallel port and
>>>>poll it periodically to figure out the frequency of the 8 squarewaves on
>>>>individual parallel port pins.
>>>>These frequencies could be used as control values in a Pd patch. The
>>>>advantages are that 555 timer circuits with a variable resistor are
>>>>very cheap, and simple. Your range would be from where frequency updates
>>>>are too far between (let's say 100Hz) to the upper-range of the parallel
>>>>port polling frequency. So if you can poll it at 8000Hz you would
>>>>probably want to stop at nyquist to get meaningful updates let's say at
>>>>4000Hz (not quite certain that nyquist is relevant here though).
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>Interesting, but I'm not sure it's possible to poll the parallel port as
>>>fast. With my parapin object, I use 1Khz by default, which correspond to
>>>the maximum resolution of timers in PD (but I might be wrong).
>>>http://www.pure-data.org/Members/odradek/parapin
>>>--
>>>Marc
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>PD-list mailing list
>>>PD-list at iem.at
>>>http://iem.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-list
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>PD-list mailing list
>>PD-list at iem.at
>>http://iem.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-list
>>
>>    
>>
>
>	zen
>	   \
>	    \
>	     \
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>PD-list mailing list
>PD-list at iem.at
>http://iem.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-list
>  
>


-- 
____________________________________________________
independent u.s. drum'n'bass -- http://vitriolix.com