We've launched the new forums! Read more here

Launch Monitors: Radar vs Camera

SuperStroke
I haven't watched the video yet, but my instructor upgraded from the GC2+HMT to the Quad and one of the first things I noticed was how much bigger the area is that the unit can sense for the ball

With the old GC2 he had to move the unit around slightly depending on whether I was hitting an iron or driver, but with this he just sets it up, uses the calibration rod to set the target line if needed, then we get to work on my swing

The screen is better than the old GC2 as well with the way (and amount) the information is displayed

It will be interesting to see if he uses it for putting as he already has a SAM PuttLab as well
 
Phenomenal interview and so educational! Interesting to hear how other systems are calibrated using camera technology. I loved the idea of putter fittings! Oh and the future implications of the "quad camera" system providing yet to be interpreted. This video could've kept going!

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
 
Did you get any information on the future of the ridiculous stickers and if there is a plan/idea to possibly get the system to track a clubhead without them?
 
-CRW- said:
Did you get any information on the future of the ridiculous stickers and if there is a plan/idea to possibly get the system to track a clubhead without them?
Click to expand...

I still don't see why those are so ridiculous if they are allowing more accurate data to be collected. Does it mean someone has to wait an extra 10 seconds for them to be added? Sure, but if someone is looking for the most accurate readouts, then that 10 seconds is worth it no?
 
ddec said:
I still don't see why those are so ridiculous if they are allowing more accurate data to be collected. Does it mean someone has to wait an extra 10 seconds for them to be added? Sure, but if someone is looking for the most accurate readouts, then that 10 seconds is worth it no?
Click to expand...

This is exactly my take. Sure, it would be nice for them to not be necessary but heck, if it means more accurate, I'm in.
 
ddec said:
I still don't see why those are so ridiculous if they are allowing more accurate data to be collected. Does it mean someone has to wait an extra 10 seconds for them to be added? Sure, but if someone is looking for the most accurate readouts, then that 10 seconds is worth it no?
Click to expand...

One of benefits of not having to do it, is the ability for those readings outside on the range. However in this instance, you get a ton of data without using them outside, and then add even more when using them inside. Watching a side by side comparison (not at Foresight) this week, showed me a number of things where the unit is just incredible. Now add the putting ability and less room needed for inside and its really a fantastic device.

When it comes to impact accuracy, I dont believe there is anything on the market that can touch it.
 
JB said:
One of benefits of not having to do it, is the ability for those readings outside on the range. However in this instance, you get a ton of data without using them outside, and then add even more when using them inside. Watching a side by side comparison (not at Foresight) this week, showed me a number of things where the unit is just incredible. Now add the putting ability and less room needed for inside and its really a fantastic device.

When it comes to impact accuracy, I dont believe there is anything on the market that can touch it.
Click to expand...

The putting aspect still has me chomping at the bit. So cool.
 
-CRW- said:
Did you get any information on the future of the ridiculous stickers and if there is a plan/idea to possibly get the system to track a clubhead without them?
Click to expand...

ddec said:
I still don't see why those are so ridiculous if they are allowing more accurate data to be collected. Does it mean someone has to wait an extra 10 seconds for them to be added? Sure, but if someone is looking for the most accurate readouts, then that 10 seconds is worth it no?
Click to expand...

With regards to the stickers, I have found that they don't come off the club face easily, even when I have cleaned my clubs

Sure, it would be nice if you could just pull a club out of your bag and swing, but I am with Dean that I would rather wait the few seconds it takes to put them on and have the most accurate data I can
 
Maybe not, but you absolutely will not see it take over Trackman's spot on the tour until they figure out how to get rid of them. At most you'll see a handful more on the ranges at tour stops.

I'm not going to argue over accuracy, but they are doing something similar to the radar based devices but require stickers where the others don't and it cost about the same. If they knocked it down to 5K or so I'd say there is no excuse not to have one at every range, course, and in many more homes. I'd put up with stickers at the right price.
 
ddec said:
I still don't see why those are so ridiculous if they are allowing more accurate data to be collected. Does it mean someone has to wait an extra 10 seconds for them to be added? Sure, but if someone is looking for the most accurate readouts, then that 10 seconds is worth it no?
Click to expand...

This - if I'm spending the time and money trying to practice and dial in my swing, and get the most out of my swing/equipment, I can spend the time adding the stickers to give me the most accurate information possible.
 
FWIW, Trackman has already added a putting app to their system and it's operational now. It'll be interesting to see the comparisons once GCQuad has its putting analysis up and running.

I'm not sure I can understand the nuts and bolts of the differences between the 2 systems, but it's cool that the competition seems to be driving innovation. I hope that the prices also come down in time so that it's more readily available for the regular golfer, as opposed to mainly being used by pros and fitters.
 
JB said:
One of benefits of not having to do it, is the ability for those readings outside on the range. However in this instance, you get a ton of data without using them outside, and then add even more when using them inside. Watching a side by side comparison (not at Foresight) this week, showed me a number of things where the unit is just incredible. Now add the putting ability and less room needed for inside and its really a fantastic device.

When it comes to impact accuracy, I dont believe there is anything on the market that can touch it.
Click to expand...

Using launch monitors indoors is a topic that Foresight or most everyone else don't talk about enough. The big advantage is what you touched on briefly with respect to putting - the amount of room needed to get accurate measurement results.

With full swings radar based systems need at least two full ball rotations to provide accurate numbers. People with high swing speeds and virtually all tour players would have to place the LM in a location where the device "can see" at least 12 feet of ball flight before the ball hits the net. That is the distance that is required to "see" two full rotations of the golf ball. By comparison the GCquad only needs about 3 to 4 feet. For indoor use is a huge advantage and IMO Foresight didn't even touch on this topic.

EDIT: Another great video BTW.
 
So there really wasn't an answer on the sticker question. Is it not even on Foresights radar to consider improving/eliminating? Or was it not discussed?

ETA - "Foresight"
 
Last edited:
-CRW- said:
So there really wasn't an answer on the sticker question. Is it not even on Flighscope's radar to consider improving/eliminating? Or was it not discussed?
Click to expand...

The video is done with Foresight, not Flightscope, that is a different company.
And more content is coming soon.
 
2Bad4u said:
Using launch monitors indoors is a topic that Foresight or most everyone else don't talk about enough. The big advantage is what you touched on briefly with respect to putting - the amount of room needed to get accurate measurement results.

With full swings radar based systems need at least two full ball rotations to provide accurate numbers. People with high swing speeds and virtually all tour players would have to place the LM in a location where the device "can see" at least 12 feet of ball flight before the ball hits the net. That is the distance that is required to "see" two full rotations of the golf ball. By comparison the GCquad only needs about 3 to 4 feet. For indoor use is a huge advantage and IMO Foresight didn't even touch on this topic.

EDIT: Another great video BTW.
Click to expand...

Without a doubt and something that we spoke with at numerous OEMs and shaft companies about over the last few months as we have moved further into our research with all four of the launch monitor companies.
It is our belief that at impact, there is nothing more accurate than high speed cameras.
 
Thanks for another great video that gives insight on things that I'm not familiar with. There were a couple takeaways from the video for me. First the fact that Foresight's tech is used to ensure the algorithms that the radar based lm's use is accurate is kinda funny, but to me shows where the quality of the system. Second is the statement that we're two years away from ranges/clubs having launch monitor's onsite would be a welcomed addition to any of the ranges in my area. I know JB mentioned having seen some already with the tech, it's yet to reach any of the places I've visited so far here locally.
 
JB said:
The video is done with Foresight, not Flightscope, that is a different company.
And more content is coming soon.
Click to expand...

You know what I meant. And still didn't answer the question.
 
Actually I did. More content is coming soon...

and when all of it is out, then we can ask what questions we did or didn't ask. While I know people like to have everything right away, it takes a bit to edit 256gb of video. Yet THP will continue to bring more behind the scenes information than any place on the web.
 
-CRW- said:
So there really wasn't an answer on the sticker question. Is it not even on Foresights radar to consider improving/eliminating? Or was it not discussed?

ETA - "Foresight"
Click to expand...

Because of the different shapes and sizes of irons, wedges, drivers, etc. they use the stickers on the clubface of the club to know where exactly where ball impact was made, and track the actual clubface better. To the best of my understanding there are no plans to eliminate the dots.

With that being said if they are able to get around the above clubface challenges you can bet they they will eliminate the dots. But don't hold your breath.
 
I understand why the use them. What I don't understand is why the camera technology can't pick up the edge of a club face? You'd think as high resolution as the cameras are that they could differentiate between the edge of the club and any other object. Even more so, since the cameras are directed at the ball they should see one extreme of the club and the other and show exactly where it contacted in a defined measurement from either end. That same idea could be expanded to the how the club face and either end of the club approaches the ball.

The other issue for me is the human error in applying stickers slightly differently from one club to the next resulting in different results with the same swing. Maybe they've somehow addressed that on the software side, but I can't see how with the need for stickers for the cameras to "see"/measure in space.
 
JB said:
THP staff writers will be using GC2 with full software until Foresight catches up on GCQuad. The demand is ludicrous right now but they have increased production and added more people to get there.
Click to expand...


That's an awesome upgrade for THP Staff writers.

Any chance for a THP discount on a GCQuad (kidding but not really)?

One of the arguments I heard from a Trackman salesperson was alignment. How does Foresight direct you to align the unit so it's pointed at the intended target?
 
sandiegonative said:
That's an awesome upgrade for THP Staff writers.

Any chance for a THP discount on a GCQuad (kidding but not really)?

One of the arguments I heard from a Trackman salesperson was alignment. How does Foresight direct you to align the unit so it's pointed at the intended target?
Click to expand...

Its actually pretty interesting and we have some info coming up in a future episode of Tech Talk on it.
 
-CRW- said:
The other issue for me is the human error in applying stickers slightly differently from one club to the next resulting in different results with the same swing. Maybe they've somehow addressed that on the software side,
Click to expand...

I've wondered about this too as I have quite a bit of practical experience solving similar standardization issues encountered when developing measurement systems like this. Having never seen the unit first hand my assumption was the stickers might come attached to some sort of template that you aligned to the center of the bottom groove or something to maintain consistent sticker geometry per the clubface center. More info is on the way (and I can't wait). But I don't see where slightly misaligned sticker position should pose a real 'huge' issue in an application like this though.
 
-CRW- said:
Maybe not, but you absolutely will not see it take over Trackman's spot on the tour until they figure out how to get rid of them. At most you'll see a handful more on the ranges at tour stops.

I'm not going to argue over accuracy, but they are doing something similar to the radar based devices but require stickers where the others don't and it cost about the same. If they knocked it down to 5K or so I'd say there is no excuse not to have one at every range, course, and in many more homes. I'd put up with stickers at the right price.
Click to expand...

I don't want to post actual pricing, but you are incorrect. The GCQuad is significantly less than TrackMan 4 (Outdoor version). In addition, from my research and speaking to various salespersons, not only does the GCQuad do "something similar" to radar based launch monitors (like TrackMan), it does it better (at a lower price).

What is the "right price" for you? For me it's a pipe dream at $2,000 (I'm not holding my breath).

I don't understand your heartburn with the dots. Unless you're a tour player or competing in tournaments that require your equipment to be conforming (no dots/stickers). I had the dots on my clubs and they never bothered me. They don't fall off while you are golfing and only came off after I peeled them off (the indoor range with GC2 near my house closed up shop).

- One dot provides Club Head speed, efficiency, path and angle of attack.
https://www.foresightsports.com/sites/default/files/files/HMT_ONE_DOT_INSTRUCT_v3_Red.pdf

- Four dots provide all Club Head data.
https://www.foresightsports.com/sites/default/files/files/HMT_QuickStart_Guide.pdf
 
finally got a chance to finish watching this. I think I saw hearts in JB's eyes as he described the accuracy of the GCQuad. Out of all the goodness in the vid, the biggest takeaway for me is that more and more places will have this technology. Would love to see these integrated in ranges and golf shops.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top