Patrick,

> Out of curiosity, do you know what distortion model they use? 

As Kurt suggests, it's a proprietary algorithm. It looks like a 2D spline
warp.

> Actually, every Image message is paired with a CameraInfo message having
> the
> same timestamp. So unfortunately putting custom maps in CameraInfo would
> be
> very expensive in bandwidth. image_geometry::PinholeCameraModel is
> optimized
> to only rebuild the undistort maps when the parameters change (e.g. in
> self-calibrating systems).

Is it possible to get the same effect by sending a CameraInfo message only
when calibration parameters change? 

> Another way is to replicate the topics produced by stereo_image_proc in
> your
> driver node. 

Yes, that's a possibility. I see a few drawbacks. First, it's a bit of work
to get going---significant work if I want it to be robust, well documented,
and tested. Second, it produces a substantial bit of code that has to be
maintained as ROS evolves. From my perspective, the sooner data from my
sensors gets into common code (well-used, well-documented, well-tested), the
better.

> For Diamondback I'm planning to refactor the image_pipeline into nodelets.

That sounds great! If I do end up going the route of reproducing the
functionality of stereo_image_proc, I'd like to do that on the first pass.
This will avoid extra work when Diamondback comes out. Is there a roadmap
available for what this will look like?

Thanks,

Paul

-- 
View this message in context: http://ros-users.122217.n3.nabble.com/Using-Bumblebee-Xb3-with-image-pipeline-tp1558108p1560691.html
Sent from the ROS-Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.