Jack, Thanks for the update. Could you post a launch file that works for you, grabbing just whatever the first camera plugged in is? I updated my version of camera1394 and verified that both /image_raw and /camera_info had nonzero timestamps, but image_proc topics still won't output anything using the launch file I specified in the original report. I'm going to try it on another system using a clean boxturtle install (I run latest on my laptop); if you have a system running latest instead of boxturtle, could you give it a shot and let me know if it still runs there? - Eric On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 7:34 PM, Jack O'Quin wrote: > On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 4:24 PM, Jack O'Quin wrote: >> On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 2:57 PM, Eric Perko wrote: >> >>> Has anyone else been able to get any 1394 camera working with >>> image_proc using either camera1394 or an older 1394 driver? >> >> Yes! >> >> I just noticed that camera1394 was publishing a zero time stamp. >> (Didn't we used to get warnings about that?). >> >> A quick fix to set the time stamp before publishing, and it works now >> for me. I'll commit this one-line fix to SVN shortly. Please give it a >> try (and thanks again for the bug report, Eric). > > Note that this was just a quick hack using ros::Time::now(). > > I see that some versions of libdc1394 can return a timestamp for the > actual image capture. This is obviously better, I'll see if I can get > that to work reliably. If I can, I'll set that in the message header. > -- >  joq > _______________________________________________ > ros-users mailing list > ros-users@code.ros.org > https://code.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users >