I’ve been working on a WebAR engine called encantar.js. You can use it in combination with Babylon.js to create Augmented Reality experiences. It’s open source, easy to use, GPU-accelerated and it can be used anywhere (it’s not WebXR; it’s Augmented Reality made from scratch with computer vision).
At the present time the engine features image tracking. There is a Babylon.js demo that you can try with your mobile device or with your PC. I created this account to share it with you, guys!
I currently use AR.js with marker tracking in my project, I wonder how this compares to it and what differences there are? I see it’s “just” image tracking (no marker tracking), presumably that will result in slightly lower tracking quality than AR.js marker tracking.
I also see that in the demo the input video is quite low resolution (320x568), it would be interesting to see how much it affects performance to increase that, to allow the markers to track better slightly further away…
Totally rooting for you with this project! Having basically only AR.js for open source AR tracking isn’t very good, especially considering it’s not in development any more…
I keep a low resolution by default to have it run on all kinds of devices of various audiences, but you can use the API to increase the resolution of the tracking, of the camera, and of the rendered scene. Performance is affected by different factors such as upload times (GPU).
Do you plan to continue updating this project over time? (not asking for you to see the future just short term at least, do you consider it finished and done with or might you continue working on it a bit?).
Just trying to decide whether to spend some time testing porting one of my projects to it from AR.js!
and I’m new here.
Having basically only AR.js for open source AR tracking isn’t very good, especially considering it’s not in development any more…
just short term at least, do you consider it finished and done with or might you continue working on it a bit?).