Comparing of Qualisys and Vicon systems

[Serge Yakushevsky]

Hello,
We already has one Qualisys system, that works with "Visual 3D", EMG("Delsys") and works with force plate ("AMTI, Gen 5"). Nowwe need a new system, I would like to ask a question: what system is better forworking with these systems, Qualisys or Vicon and why?
Best Regards,
Yakushevsky Serge,
Ben-Gurion University,
Dep. of Industrial and Management Engineering

[Drew Smith]

Re: Comparing of Qualisys and Vicon systems

Hello,
We already has one Qualisys system, that works with "Visual 3D", EMG("Delsys") and works with force plate ("AMTI, Gen 5"). Nowwe need a new system, I would like to ask a question: what system is better forworking with these systems, Qualisys or Vicon and why?
Best Regards,
Yakushevsky Serge,
Ben-Gurion University,
Dep. of Industrial and Management Engineering

I started using Vicon in 1998 and used Vicon systems at three universities up until 2007. Since coming to Samuel Merritt University in August, 2013, I have been using Qualisys which is also interfaced with Delysis Trigno EMG and two AMTI Gen 5 force platforms. We are using Visual 3D as well. Although I am still learning my current system, I would say that Vicon and Qualisys are roughly equivalent in most regards. That is, where one may have some features that are superior, the other has other aspects that I like better. They both are very accurate, use digital cameras, offer sufficiently high framing rates, and easily interface with other equipment. Both are simple to calibrate and are consistently reliable under almost all conditions. Where Vicon offers their own programming language, BodyBuilder, the integration with Visual 3D is virtually seamless with Qualisys (I believe V3D will also work with Vicon but I have not had any experience). Both companies offer excellent, timely support.

Please note that I stopped using Vicon just around the time they were switching over to Nexus, so my experience with their latest software is minimal at best. However, by all accounts, users seem to like the improvements of Nexus over Workstation. I think Vicon's Polygon is an interesting product and I used it quite a bit. I think that the reporting potential of Visual 3D may give it a slight edge as it seems to be a bit more flexible, but I admit to not really pushing Polygon to its limits.

At the end of the day, it is really a personal (and perhaps a financial) decision as both companies offer a superior product to virtually any other on the market today - I have also used two other 3D systems (1 from America, 1 from Italy) but I consider Vicon and Qualisys to be better overall than either of these.

Hope this helps!

[Martin Molloy]

Re: Comparing of Qualisys and Vicon systems

I can confirm that Visual3D will work with Vicon C3D* files. Whilst I have not worked with a Nexus system, the C-Motion website describes real-time streaming functionality in Visual3D with a Vicon Nexus system.


* I'm sure many of you are aware that whilst C3D is considered a standard, there are differing implementations of it.

[Drew Smith]

Re: Comparing of Qualisys and Vicon systems

I can confirm that Visual3D will work with Vicon C3D* files. Whilst I have not worked with a Nexus system, the C-Motion website describes real-time streaming functionality in Visual3D with a Vicon Nexus system.


* I'm sure many of you are aware that whilst C3D is considered a standard, there are differing implementations of it.

Another thing I like about Qualisys: I have used the real-time interface between Qualisys and Visual 3D and found it to be very impressive. Up until last year, I would have said I was a die-hard Vicon fan, especially considering the struggle I had with another system during the previous 4 years, but I am completely happy with Qualisys and would not consider swapping it for a comparable Vicon system.