It builds off of your Player SR3K driver. There's a swissranger in Player now that supports the 4K and the new Mesa library API for 3k/4k devices. My ROS one basically has the same guts as the Player one. This is a bit different from your ROS sr3k driver, but works quite well. It could stand to be updated to use image_transport and needs a some tf info, but we could open source it (considering it's largely based off your Player code anyway). Radu Bogdan Rusu wrote: > Patrick, is your SR4k driver different than the one that I wrote some time ago ? > (http://www.ros.org/browse/details.php?name=swissranger) If so, I would like to merge/deprecate that, provided that you > will release yours as open source. > > > Patrick Beeson wrote: >> FYI, >> >> I have my own ROS node that combines cameradc1394 with the Player 1394 >> driver. It works very reliably and depends on nothing but sensor_msgs >> (I have to say that I do not like having to download the kitchen sink >> just to get a simple hardware driver working, which is why I have my own >> versions of Swissranger 4K driver, 1394 camera, etc.). >> >> Jack has been using it, along with a visualization tool I forked from >> somewhere. I think I'll work with Jack to get this added to his ROS >> repository, or start my own (I'm assuming a reliable Swissranger 4000 >> driver would be of desire to someone out there). But, I should go ahead >> and make it start using the image_transport package. So, it'll probably >> be a few weeks before this shows up in the ROS package browse. >> >> >> >> >> Jack O'Quin wrote: >>> On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 9:29 AM, Rosen Diankov wrote: >>>> I'm sorry you've been having so many problems with cameradc1394, >>>> perhaps we can come up with a solution that will work well for you. >>> Thanks, Rosen. >>> >>> I do not mean to come across as harshly critical of cameradc1394. I >>> appreciate the work that has gone into it, and want to make it more >>> accessible to users. We are trying to get undergraduates working >>> productively with ROS vision components. Many of them are unfamiliar >>> with both ROS and Linux. They will have a lot more trouble getting >>> this working than I did. >>> >>>> - You say it seems to work but not easy to install? Typing 'rosmake >>>> cameradc1394' should make and install everything for you, so are you >>>> having trouble compiling things? >>> I did get it to work. It just took me a couple of hours. See below... >>> >>>> - i think the libdc1394v2 package is for systems that do not have >>>> libdc1394 version 2 installed, otherwise the library itself should be >>>> stable. >>> On a recent boxturtle ROS install, the rosmake will fail because >>> cameradc1394 depends on libdc1394v2, which is no longer being >>> distributed. So, users either have to edit your manifest.xml to remove >>> that dependency (which is still needed on Ubuntu Hardy), or they have >>> to find and install the SVN repository for the >>> camera_drivers_experimental package (doable, but not trivial). >>> >>>> - cameradc1394 links the the ROS image libraries in order to >>>> serialize/convert the message correctly, display the image, and >>>> undistort it (radial distortion). You can disable the display >>>> dynamically, so the the only other place where opencv would be used is >>>> for undistortion and sending messages. Fortunately, both of these are >>>> not that heavy on computation, so your system should handle it. >>> I am not particularly worried about computational overhead. It's more >>> a question of system design and consistency. >>> >>> The other ROS camera drivers do not depend on opencv2. There are >>> higher-level packages, such as image_view for that sort of function. >>> I'd prefer a simple DC1394 driver that behaves like the other ROS >>> camera packages. That way people can work consistently with all those >>> devices. >>> >>>> - i'm pretty sure the svn checkout command on sourceforge points to >>>> the correct code: >>>> svn co https://cmu-ros-pkg.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/cmu-ros-pkg cmu-ros-pkg >>>> >>>> The 'trunk' folder might be making things a little confusing for you, >>>> therefore i recommend: >>>> >>>> svn co https://cmu-ros-pkg.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/cmu-ros-pkg/trunk >>>> cmu-ros-pkg >>> As you say, that is the correct URL for checkout. This error is >>> currently not important, because you have no other branches (so far). >>> But, you would not want users accidentally checking out *all* the >>> branches instead of just the mainline version. When there is a stable >>> version, they should check out branches/latest, instead, I suppose. >>> >>>> - There is a link on the ros.org camera_drivers webpage >>>> (http://www.ros.org/wiki/camera_drivers) into the correct wiki >>>> location where the cameradc1394 webpage is stored. I'm not sure why >>>> you feel it is hard to locate..... >>> It would be easier to find under http://ros.org/wiki/cameradc1394 >>> (which does not exist). It was hard to find because the SourceForge >>> page for cmu-ros-pkg does not point to it. I did eventually find a >>> pointer to it at the bottom of http://ros.org/wiki/libdc1394v2 (which >>> does exist). >>> >>>> - the README in the top source directory was old and contained nothing >>>> useful, i just deleted it >>> Good idea, thanks. >>> >>>> - I think you are the first person that has expressed dissatisfaction >>>> with the way cameradc1394 is structured (no code reviews, etc), I've >>>> tried to stick with the camera API willowgarage publishes as much as >>>> possible. In the past year, it has been hard to keep up with it due to >>>> many changes, but we're actively maintaining cameradc1394. For >>>> example, I just noticed that the API requires a "set_camera_info" and >>>> "request_image" services, which we will add as soon as we have time. >>> I fully understand the difficulty of tracking rapidly changing >>> interfaces in a complex system. That is why I favor better integration >>> into the ROS development process. I believe a design review would >>> have identified the inconsistencies between cameradc1394 and the other >>> ROS camera drivers. >>> >>> A good review might have caught the set_camera_info change, as well. I >>> have so far been unable to display 1394 camera images with rviz. That >>> may be the reason. >>> >>>> If it makes a big difference for your team that the cameradc1394 >>>> resided on WillowGarage's servers rather than sourceforge's, then I'm >>>> sure WillowGarage would be happy to host it. >>> I expect they would. I don't see the repo location as a problem right >>> now (as long as the checkout URL is correct and up to date). >>> >>> I believe including good documentation into the ros.org wiki would >>> make the package much more accessible to beginning users. I am willing >>> to assist, if you feel that would be helpful. I don't know much about >>> digital cameras, but I do know how to edit the wiki. :-) >>> >>> Regards, >> _______________________________________________ >> ros-users mailing list >> ros-users@code.ros.org >> https://code.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users >