Skip to main content

RGB-D Sensors as Marker-Less MOCAP Systems: A Comparison Between Microsoft Kinect V2 and the New Microsoft Kinect Azure

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Advances in Simulation and Digital Human Modeling (AHFE 2021)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems ((LNNS,volume 264))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Marker-less motion capture (MOCAP) systems based on consumer technology simplify the analysis of movements in several research fields such as industry, healthcare and sports. Even if the marker-less MOCAP systems have performances with precision and accuracy lower than the marker-based MOCAP solutions, their low cost and ease of use make them the most suitable tools for full-body movements analysis. The most interesting category is relative to the use of RGB-D devices. This research work aims to compare the performances of the last two generations of Kinect devices as marker-less MOCAP systems: Microsoft Kinect v2 and Azure devices. To conduct the tests, a list of specific movements is acquired and evaluated. This work measures the improvements of the Azure in tracking human body movements. The gathered results are presented and discussed by evaluating performances and limitations of both marker-less MOCAP systems. Conclusions and future developments are shown and discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Zhang, Z.: Microsoft kinect sensor and its effect. IEEE Multimedia 19(2), 4–10 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Furniss, M.: Motion Capture (1999). http://web.mit.edu/m-i-t/articles/index_furniss.html

  3. Fernandez-Baena, A., Susın, A., Lligadas, X.: Biomechanical validation of upper- body and lower-body joint movements of kinect motion capture data for rehabilitation treatments. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Intelligent Networking and Collaborative Systems, INCoS 2012, pp. 656–661 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Chen, C., Jafari, R., Kehtarnavaz, N.: Improving human action recognition using fusion of depth camera and inertial sensors. IEEE Trans. Hum.-Mach. Syst. 45(1), 51–61 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Kotsifaki, A., Whiteley, R., Hansen, C.: Dual Kinect V2 system can capture lower limb kinematics reasonably well in a clinical setting: concurrent validity of a dual camera markerless motion capture system in professional football players. BMJ Open Sport Exerc. Med. 4(1) (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Stone, E.E., Butler, M., McRuer, A., Gray, A., Marks, J., Skubic, M.: Evaluation of the microsoft kinect for screening ACL injury. In: Proceedings of the Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, EMBS, vol. 2013, pp. 4152–4155 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bernardina, G.R.D., Monnet, T., Pinto, H.T., De Barros, R.M.L., Cerveri, P., Silvatti, A.P.: Are action sport cameras accurate enough for 3D motion analysis? A comparison with a commercial motion capture system. J. Appl. Biomech. 35(1), 80–86 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Vicon: Vicon Award Winning Motion Capture Systems. https://www.vicon.com/

  9. Scano, A., Mira, R.M., Cerveri, P., Molinari Tosatti, L., Sacco, M.: Analysis of upper-limb and trunk kinematic variability: accuracy and reliability of an RGB-D sensor. Multimodal Technol. Interact. 4(2), 14 (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Cai, L., Ma, Y., Xiong, S., Zhang, Y.: Validity and reliability of upper limb functional assessment using the Microsoft Kinect V2 sensor. Appl. Bionics Biomech. (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Vitali, A., Regazzoni, D., Rizzi, C., Lupi, G.: Low cost markerless motion capture systems: a comparison between RGB cameras and RGB-D sensors. In: Proceedings of the ASME IMECE 2020. American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Microsoft: Azure Kinect DK. https://azure.microsoft.com/it-it/services/kinect-dk/

  13. Albert, J.A., Owolabi, V., Gebel, A., Brahms, C.M., Granacher, U., Arnrich, B.: Evaluation of the pose tracking performance of the azure Kinect and Kinect V2 for gait analysis in comparison with a gold standard: a pilot study. Sensors 20(18), 5104 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andrea Vitali .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Rosa, B., Colombo Zefinetti, F., Vitali, A., Regazzoni, D. (2021). RGB-D Sensors as Marker-Less MOCAP Systems: A Comparison Between Microsoft Kinect V2 and the New Microsoft Kinect Azure. In: Wright, J.L., Barber, D., Scataglini, S., Rajulu, S.L. (eds) Advances in Simulation and Digital Human Modeling. AHFE 2021. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, vol 264. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-79763-8_43

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics