[ros-users] image_proc doesn't work with camera1394

Jack O'Quin jack.oquin at gmail.com
Sun Mar 28 02:57:22 UTC 2010

On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 7:13 PM, Jeremy Leibs <leibs at willowgarage.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 2:24 PM, Jack O'Quin <jack.oquin at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 2:57 PM, Eric Perko <wisesage5001 at gmail.com> 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?).
> That explains the problem.  The time-synchronizer, which synchronizes
> the image and camera_info messages requires that the two messages have
> the same timestamp.

They actually were the same: both zero. I guess it needs the times to
actually progress, as well.

> We no longer get warnings because, I believe, the time in the header
> is no longer a magic/privileged field since auto-filling based on
> ros::Time::now() is seldom actually the right behavior.


> However, I am surprised that the time-synchronizer (inside of
> image_proc) is not producing warnings about not finding matching
> timestamps, this seems like something that would be very helpful in
> debugging this kind of problem.

It should not just silently throw everything away.

An appropriate warning would be good. This probably won't be the last
time someone porting a camera driver to ROS makes that mistake.

Thanks for your help, Jeremy.

More information about the ros-users mailing list