Eye Tracking vs. Mouse Tracking
gazehawk.com
gazehawk.com
So I am very happy that guys at GazeHawk cracked this and launched the service that I really wanted to do and offer people low-cost eyetracking method.
> for an engineer it was an ultimate challenge
You won't find any argument from me; eye-tracking is extremely hard stuff to do correctly and reliably. There are many things that I still want to do to improve our implementation, but can't find the time to write.
(Insert a shameless request for interested readers to send me their resumes here!)
"There are many things that I still want to do to improve our implementation, but can't find the time to write." - so you did the main part of coding on Gazehawk?
What I did was quite a simple stuff - I combined opensource GazeTracker (http://www.gazegroup.org/downloads/23-gazetracker - that uses OpenCV) with FaceAPI from SeeingMachines. I also experimented with accelerometer module instead of FaceAPI and second webcam but that was a dead end :) In the end after calibration I managed to get about 1-2cm accuracy on 2 test subjects. After my dad came with his smaller eyes and accuracy went dramatically down - I gave up :)
You'll have to re-blur the areas when you leave them of course so that the reader goes back to the other content.
I would assume that eye tracking is mainly for looking at content and secondly for looking for next actions, while mouse movement would be primarily for locating next actions and secondarily for interacting with content.
(Much of the time I am using hotkeys, and when I am actually using the mouse it is often flitting around in my peripheral vision where I can see it but don't focus on it)
Then again, highlighting is low-tech, easy enough and works fine. Maybe I'm looking for an idea that isn't there.
With mouse tracking just need to bring them to my web site.
Of course, I understand how better eye tracking is. But I'm not talking about that here.