This forum is disabled, please visit https://forum.opencv.org
 | 1 | initial version |
Well, i just spent 20 minutes writing up an answer that is working with threads - to be told by the forum that as a new user I have to wait 19 more hours to post an answer. My answer was nowhere to be seen, and upon clicking back on my browser it was forever gone.
It's been a while since the days I'd habitually copy everything in the clipboard to avoid this carry on.
The code at least: http://pastebin.com/T606VtCF
:D
| | 2 | No.2 Revision |
Well, i just spent 20 minutes writing up an Forum/browser software deleted a more detailed answer that - but the following code is working with threads :)
I get 120fps in fastLoop and 63fps in the viewLoop - adding processing to fastLoop shows an eventual slowdown, once this reaches 63 they are both 63 and the threads I guess are then redundant.
It's pretty bare - but worked straight away, which was surprising. Maybe someone can point out issues with it?
#include "cameralibrary.h"
#include "face_supportcode.h"
#include "opencv2/opencv.hpp"
#include <opencv2/core/core.hpp>
#include <opencv2/highgui/highgui.hpp>
#include <iostream>
#include <thread>
#include <mutex>
#include "serial.h"
using namespace cv;
using namespace std;
using namespace CameraLibrary;
#define CAMERA_WIDTH 640
#define CAMERA_HEIGHT 480
mutex mtx; // might not actually need to be told by the forum that as a new user I have to wait 19 more hours to post an answer. My answer was nowhere to be seen, and upon clicking back on my browser global ...
void fastLoopCode(Mat& frameCV) {
//mutex mtx; //try it was forever gone. It's been a while since the days I'd habitually copy everything
in the clipboard to avoid this carry on. The code at least: http://pastebin.com/T606VtCF
:D
here
CameraManager::X().WaitForInitialization();
Camera *camera = CameraManager::X().GetCamera();
camera->SetVideoType(Core::GrayscaleMode);
Frame *frame;
camera->Start();
while(1){
frame = camera->GetLatestFrame();
if(frame){
mtx.lock();
frame->Rasterize(CAMERA_WIDTH, CAMERA_HEIGHT, (unsigned int) frameCV.step, 8, frameCV.data);
mtx.unlock();
frame->Release();
}
}
camera->Release();
CameraManager::X().Shutdown();
}
void viewLoopCode(Mat& frameCV) {
namedWindow("frame", WINDOW_AUTOSIZE);
while(1){
imshow("frame", frameCV);
waitKey(1);
}
}
int main(int argc, char** argv){
Mat frameCV(Size(CAMERA_WIDTH, CAMERA_HEIGHT), CV_8UC1);
thread fastLoop (fastLoopCode, frameCV);
thread viewLoop (viewLoopCode, frameCV);
fastLoop.join();
viewLoop.join();
}
| | 3 | No.3 Revision |
Forum/browser software deleted a more detailed answer - but the following code is working with threads :)
I get 120fps in fastLoop and 63fps in the viewLoop - adding processing to fastLoop shows an eventual slowdown, once this reaches 63 they are both 63 and the threads I guess are then redundant.
It's pretty bare - but worked straight away, which was surprising. Maybe someone can point out issues with it?
#include "cameralibrary.h"
"cameralibrary.h" //specific to my camera ...
#include "face_supportcode.h"
#include "opencv2/opencv.hpp"
#include <opencv2/core/core.hpp>
#include <opencv2/highgui/highgui.hpp>
#include <iostream>
#include <thread>
#include <mutex>
#include "serial.h"
using namespace cv;
using namespace std;
using namespace CameraLibrary;
#define CAMERA_WIDTH 640
#define CAMERA_HEIGHT 480
mutex mtx; // might not actually need to be global ...
void fastLoopCode(Mat& frameCV) {
//mutex mtx; //try it in here
CameraManager::X().WaitForInitialization();
Camera *camera = CameraManager::X().GetCamera();
camera->SetVideoType(Core::GrayscaleMode);
Frame *frame;
camera->Start();
while(1){
frame = camera->GetLatestFrame();
if(frame){
mtx.lock();
frame->Rasterize(CAMERA_WIDTH, CAMERA_HEIGHT, (unsigned int) frameCV.step, 8, frameCV.data);
mtx.unlock();
frame->Release();
}
}
camera->Release();
CameraManager::X().Shutdown();
}
void viewLoopCode(Mat& frameCV) {
namedWindow("frame", WINDOW_AUTOSIZE);
while(1){
imshow("frame", frameCV);
waitKey(1);
}
}
int main(int argc, char** argv){
Mat frameCV(Size(CAMERA_WIDTH, CAMERA_HEIGHT), CV_8UC1);
thread fastLoop (fastLoopCode, frameCV);
thread viewLoop (viewLoopCode, frameCV);
fastLoop.join();
viewLoop.join();
}
| | 4 | No.4 Revision |
Forum/browser software deleted a more detailed answer - but the following code is working with threads :)
I get 120fps in fastLoop and 63fps in the viewLoop - adding processing to fastLoop shows an eventual slowdown, once this reaches 63 they are both 63 and the threads I guess are then redundant.
It's pretty bare - but worked straight away, which was surprising. Maybe someone can point out issues with it?
#include "cameralibrary.h" //specific //#include something specific to my your camera ...
#include "face_supportcode.h"
...
#include "opencv2/opencv.hpp"
#include <opencv2/core/core.hpp>
#include <opencv2/highgui/highgui.hpp>
#include <iostream>
#include <thread>
#include <mutex>
#include "serial.h"
using namespace cv;
using namespace std;
using namespace CameraLibrary;
#define CAMERA_WIDTH 640
#define CAMERA_HEIGHT 480
mutex mtx; // might not actually need to be global ...
void fastLoopCode(Mat& frameCV) {
//mutex mtx; //try it in here
CameraManager::X().WaitForInitialization();
Camera *camera = CameraManager::X().GetCamera();
camera->SetVideoType(Core::GrayscaleMode);
//initialize your camera etc.
Frame *frame;
camera->Start();
*frame; //direct data from camera...
while(1){
frame = camera->GetLatestFrame();
if(frame){
mtx.lock();
frame->Rasterize(CAMERA_WIDTH, CAMERA_HEIGHT, (unsigned int) frameCV.step, 8, frameCV.data);
//whatever code required to turn the camera data into an openCV Mat
mtx.unlock();
frame->Release();
}
}
camera->Release();
CameraManager::X().Shutdown();
}
void viewLoopCode(Mat& frameCV) {
namedWindow("frame", WINDOW_AUTOSIZE);
while(1){
imshow("frame", frameCV);
waitKey(1);
}
}
int main(int argc, char** argv){
Mat frameCV(Size(CAMERA_WIDTH, CAMERA_HEIGHT), CV_8UC1);
thread fastLoop (fastLoopCode, frameCV);
thread viewLoop (viewLoopCode, frameCV);
fastLoop.join();
viewLoop.join();
}
| | 5 | No.5 Revision |
Forum/browser software deleted a more detailed answer - but the following code is working with threads :)
I get 120fps in fastLoop and 63fps in the viewLoop - adding processing to fastLoop shows an eventual slowdown, once this reaches 63 they are both 63 and the threads I guess are then redundant.
It's pretty bare - but worked straight away, which was surprising. Maybe someone can point out issues with it?
Quick and hopefully correct explanation: mtx.lock means all memory locations within the lock are only accessible by the code within the lock, for the duration of the lock - this avoids concurrent read writes of the Mat memory locations by each thread. It is my understanding that it grants the fastLoop thread more priority over the viewLoop thread.
//#include something specific to your camera ...
#include "opencv2/opencv.hpp"
#include <opencv2/core/core.hpp>
#include <opencv2/highgui/highgui.hpp>
#include <thread>
#include <mutex>
using namespace cv;
using namespace std;
mutex mtx; // might not actually need to be global ...
void fastLoopCode(Mat& frameCV) {
//mutex mtx; //try it in here
//initialize your camera etc.
Frame *frame; //direct data from camera...
while(1){
frame = camera->GetLatestFrame();
if(frame){
mtx.lock();
//whatever code required to turn the camera data into an openCV Mat
mtx.unlock();
frame->Release();
}
}
camera->Release();
}
void viewLoopCode(Mat& frameCV) {
namedWindow("frame", WINDOW_AUTOSIZE);
while(1){
imshow("frame", frameCV);
waitKey(1);
}
}
int main(int argc, char** argv){
Mat frameCV(Size(CAMERA_WIDTH, CAMERA_HEIGHT), CV_8UC1);
thread fastLoop (fastLoopCode, frameCV);
thread viewLoop (viewLoopCode, frameCV);
fastLoop.join();
viewLoop.join();
}