Apologies for the broken github link, the correct one is: https://github.com/atrevor/kinect_node.git On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 2:20 AM, Alex Trevor wrote: > Wow, looks like quite a few people are working on kinect nodes; we should > probably combine efforts! We’ve also been working on a kinect node for ROS > based on Hector Martin’s driver, available at: > git://github.com/atrevor/kinect_node.git > > Short youtube rviz screencap: > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IxRIL1izvDs > > We assume that you have libfreenect from Hector Martin’s repo in the same > parent directory (../libfreenect w.r.t. kinect_node): > git://git.marcansoft.com/libfreenect.git > > So far, it publishes the camera image, as well as a PointCloud2 of > PointXYZRGBs. The RGB camera’s image is projected onto the range data, > resulting in a color point cloud. We calibrated the RGB camera, but haven’t > yet calibrated the range camera -- since we can’t just use our normal > checkerboard calibration target for this :) . As Ivan and Stefan noted, the > ranges we get are a little odd -- they definitely don't seem to be linear. > We calibrated it so the range is approximately correct at 2m for our > sensor, but I agree that we really need to know how these work to make much > progress. We'll probably do some testing shortly with targets at various > ranges to attempt to address this. Any input would be greatly appreciated! > > On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 5:41 PM, Stefan Kohlbrecher < > stefan.kohlbrecher@googlemail.com> wrote: > >> > 1. Is the depth image really 640x480, or is that oversampled? The >> > wikipedia page states the depth sensor has an resolution of 320×240 >> > pixels. If it's oversampled, where does that take place - in the >> > driver, or the device itself? I prefer not inflating the point cloud >> > with oversampled data >> I think the device itself reports the data with this size. If you look >> at the picture I posted in the second post you also see that there are >> for example one pixel sized holes in the 640x480 sized depth image, >> which should not exist if some very simple interpolation scheme would >> be used to blow up a 320x240 image to 640x480. >> From what I read beforehand, the original Project Natal was supposed >> to be 640x480, then Microsoft reportedly "downgraded" to 320x240 for >> cost reasons (see >> >> http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=kinect+downgraded+to+320x240 >> ). >> Now the sensor appears to deliver 640x480 again, which might or might >> not be just blown up 320x240on the onboard ASIC. >> >> > 2. What is the relationship between the values in the depth_frame and >> > the distance in meters? It doesn't appear to be linear >> That´s really the interesting question, along with others like how to >> calibrate visual and depth image to get real RGB-D data. With the >> current state of affairs one can generate some impressive looking >> images, but to leverage the full potential of the sensor these >> calibration questions really have to be solved. >> >> > 3. I read somewhere the device's range can be set dynamically. I'm >> > guessing one of the inits in inits.c could be responsible for the >> > range. >> That´s more stuff that will probably be discovered in the coming >> days/weeks. Still very impressive how good the sensor works already >> right out of the box. >> >> > _______________________________________________ >> > ros-users mailing list >> > ros-users@code.ros.org >> > https://code.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> ros-users mailing list >> ros-users@code.ros.org >> https://code.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users >> > >