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

Eric Perko wisesage5001 at gmail.com
Sun Mar 28 03:46:24 UTC 2010

I was able to get this working on boxturtle (dunno what in latest
causes it to fail, but it still doesn't work when using the install
from http://ros.org/rosinstalls/latest_pr2.rosinstall and
http://www.ros.org/rosinstalls/wg_latest_devel.rosinstall). It does
work with the install from /boxturtle_pr2.rosinstall and then just
checking out camera1394 and libdc1394v2 from trunk individually. Jack,
it seems to be working fine for me with the updated libdc1394 based
timestamp as well.

Jack and Jeremy, thanks for your help getting all this sorted out and working.

- Eric

On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 10:57 PM, Jack O'Quin <jack.oquin at gmail.com> wrote:
> 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.
> Agreed.
>> 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.
> --
>  joq
> _______________________________________________
> ros-users mailing list
> ros-users at code.ros.org
> https://code.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users

More information about the ros-users mailing list