Comparative study of marker-based and markerless tracking in augmented reality under variable environmental conditions

Article Sidebar

PDF
Published: Dec 30, 2024
DOI: https://doi.org/10.52465/joscex.v5i4.503
Article Metrics

Main Article Content

Mulia Sulistiyono
Department of Informatics, Universitas AMIKOM Yogyakarta, Indonesia
Jaka Wardana Hasyim
Department of Informatics, Universitas AMIKOM Yogyakarta, Indonesia
Bernadhed Bernadhed
Department of Information Technology, Universitas AMIKOM Yogyakarta, Indonesia
Febri Liantoni
Department of Informatics and Computer Engineering Education, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Indonesia
Acihmah Sidauruk
Department of Information System, Universitas Amikom Yogyakarta, Indonesia

Abstract

Augmented reality (AR) technology integrates virtual content into real environments using two main methods: marker-based and markerless tracking. Marker-based tracking relies on printed markers for object placement, while markerless uses environmental features for flexibility and accuracy. This research aims to evaluate the combined impact of environmental factors-distance, angle, and lighting-on these two methods. The Multimedia Development Life Cycle (MDLC) methodology was applied by testing 72 combinations of indicators: distance (5-120 cm), angle (30°, 45°, 90°), and light color (red, blue, green, yellow) using Xiaomi Note 8 and Google Pixel 4. Results show markerless tracking is superior in all conditions, achieving a 94.4% success rate on both devices. In contrast, marker-based tracking only achieved 72.2% (Xiaomi Note 8) and 77.8% (Google Pixel 4). Markerless tracking was optimally performed from 50 cm away and up close, while marker-based tracking degraded in performance at long distances and red lighting. Markerless tracking proved to be more reliable and consistent, suitable for dynamic and diverse environments, while marker-based methods remained relevant for short distances and controlled lighting. These findings provide guidance for AR developers in choosing a tracking methodology according to application needs.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
[1]
M. Sulistiyono, J. W. Hasyim, B. Bernadhed, F. Liantoni, and A. Sidauruk, “Comparative study of marker-based and markerless tracking in augmented reality under variable environmental conditions”, J. Soft Comput. Explor., vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 413 - 422, Dec. 2024.
Issue
Vol. 5 No. 4 (2024): December 2024
Section
Articles
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

References

V. Marrahi-gomez and J. Belda-medina, “The Integration of Augmented Reality ( AR ) in Education,” no. January, 2023, doi: 10.14738/assrj.912.13689.

T. N. Fitria, “Augmented Reality ( AR ) and Virtual Reality ( VR ) Technology in Education : Media of Teaching and Learning : A Review,” vol. 04, no. 01, 2023.

P. A. Rauschnabel, R. Felix, C. Hinsch, H. Shahab, and F. Alt, “Computers in Human Behavior What is XR ? Towards a Framework for Augmented and Virtual Reality,” Comput. Human Behav., vol. 133, no. May 2021, p. 107289, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2022.107289.

Y. K. Dwivedi et al., “International Journal of Information Management Metaverse beyond the hype : Multidisciplinary perspectives on emerging challenges , opportunities , and agenda for research , practice and policy,” Int. J. Inf. Manage., vol. 66, no. July, p. 102542, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2022.102542.

F. Zulfiqar, R. Raza, M. O. Khan, M. Arif, A. Alvi, and T. Alam, “Augmented Reality and Its Applications in Education : A Systematic Survey,” IEEE Access, vol. 11, no. January, pp. 143250–143271, 2023, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3331218.

Y. Chen, Q. Wang, H. Chen, X. Song, and H. Tang, “An overview of augmented reality technology An overview of augmented reality technology,” 2019, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/1237/2/022082.

D. Intan, S. Saputra, L. Murjiatiningsih, H. Hermawan, and S. W. Handani, “cARica : Enhancing Travelling Experiences in Wonosobo Through Location-Based Mobile Augmented Reality,” pp. 23–30, 2022.

R. Palmarini, J. Ahmet, R. Roy, and H. Torabmostaedi, “A Systematic Review of Augmented Reality applications in Maintenance,” vol. 49, no. February, pp. 215–228, 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.rcim.2017.06.002.

A. M. Al-ansi, M. Jaboob, A. Garad, and A. Al-ansi, “Social Sciences & Humanities Open Analyzing augmented reality ( AR ) and virtual reality ( VR ) recent development in education,” Soc. Sci. Humanit. Open, vol. 8, no. 1, p. 100532, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.ssaho.2023.100532.

G. Koutromanos and G. Kazakou, “Computers & Education : X Reality Augmented reality smart glasses use and acceptance : А literature review,” Comput. Educ. X Real., vol. 2, no. January, p. 100028, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.cexr.2023.100028.

J. Bacca, S. Baldiris, R. Fabregat, and S. Graf, “Augmented Reality Trends in Education : A Systematic Review of Research and Applications Augmented Reality Trends in Education : A Systematic Review of Research and Applications,” no. January 2016, 2014.

F. A. Maulana and N. L. Azizah, “IMPLEMENTATION OF AUGMENTED REALITY AS A HAIR MODEL VISUALIZATION MEDIA BASED ON ANDROID,” vol. 17, pp. 47–54, 2023.

G. Gunawan, W. Andriani, S. Anandianskha, and M. Indratama, “Implementation Of Marker-Based Tracking Method on Augmented Reality in Multimedia Learning ( Case Study of STMIK Tegal ),” vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 1–8, 2024.

W. T. Kusuma, A. A. Supianto, H. Tolle, M. Anshori, I. Teknologi, and R. S. Soepraoen, “KEBARUAN FUNGSIONAL VERTEX MARKER TERHADAP MARKER BASED AUGMENTED REALITY TRACKING FACTORS ( JARAK , SUDUT , DAN LUAS PERMUKAAN ) FUNCTIONAL TESTING OF VERTEX MARKERS AGAINST MARKER BASED AUGMENTED REALITY TRACKING FACTORS ( DISTANCE , ANGLE , AND COVERED SURFACE AREA ),” vol. 9, no. 4, 2022, doi: 10.25126/jtiik.202295748.

H. Kato and M. Billinghurst, “Marker Tracking and HMD Calibration for a Video-based Augmented Reality Conferencing System”.

B. Arifitama, A. Syahputra, K. Bayu, and Y. Bintoro, “Analisis Perbandingan Efektifitas Metode Marker dan Markerless Tracking pada Objek Augmented Reality,” vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 1–7, 2022.

Z. Oufqir, A. el Abderrahmani, and K. Satori, “From Marker to Markerless in Augmented Reality,” Springer, pp. 599–612, 2020, doi: 10.1007/978-981-15-0947-6_57.

S. Vashisht, “Exploration of Markers in Augmented Reality: Methodologies and Applications,” 2024 Second Int. Conf. Intell. Cyber Phys. Syst. Internet Things, pp. 1082–1086, 2024, doi: 10.1109/ICoICI62503.2024.10696631.

I. Ahmad, Y. Rahmanto, D. Pratama, and R. I. Borman, “Development of augmented reality application for introducing tangible cultural heritages at the lampung museum using the multimedia development life cycle,” vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 187–194, 2021.

S. Aslamiyah, D. Ananda, A. Pertiwi, and K. Santosa, “Augmented reality development using multimedia development life cycle ( MDLC ) method in learning media,” pp. 31–38, 2023.

W. Farianto et al., “AUGMENTED REALITY OBJEK BERSEJARAH MUSEUM SOESILO SOEDARMAN MENGGUNAKAN METODE MARKER BASED DAN,” vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 141–153, 2021.

M. I. Arief, Kusrini, and T. Hidayat, “Analysis of Markerless-Based Tracking Methods of Face Tracker Techniques in Detecting Human Face Movements in 2D And 3D Filter Making,” vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 47–56, 2023.

P. Mandarani, R. Yuliani, and A. Syahrani, “PENGARUH SUDUT DAN INTENSITAS CAHAYA TERHADAP KEMUNCULAN OBJEK 3D PADA APLIKASI AUGMENTED REALITY,” J. Edik Inform., vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 73–84, 2020, doi: 10.22202/ei.2020.v7i1.4338.

Y. B. Mulia and E. U. P. B. Bangun, “Analisis Perbandingan Metode Marker dan Markerless Angka 0-9 3D Pada Teknologi Augmented Reality,” J. Teknol. Dan Sist. Inf. Bisnis, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 454–459, 2023, doi: 10.47233/jteksis.v5i4.886.

Y. Gao, “Influence of Virtual Objects ’ Shadows and Lighting Coherence on Distance Perception in Optical See-Through Augmented Reality,” no. July, 2019, doi: 10.1002/jsid.832.

Abstract viewed = 72 times