cvFindContours is faster than cv::findcontours

asked 2016-11-17 10:17:13 -0600

andreadc
16 ●3

updated 2016-11-18 05:20:49 -0600

Hi, I'm using 2.4.13 opencv in a VS application and I have just updated source code changing old C functions with new C++ functions. In particular I have verified that cv::findcontours is slower than cvFindContours.

For example I have tried with that code:

for( i=0; i<10000; i++ ) {
    cvThreshold(gray, tmp, 225, 255, CV_THRESH_BINARY);
    cvFindContours(tmp, storage, &contours, sizeof(CvContour), CV_RETR_CCOMP, CV_CHAIN_APPROX_SIMPLE);

    cvInitTreeNodeIterator(&iterator, contours, 2);
    while( src_cc= (CvSeq*)cvNextTreeNode(&iterator) ) {
        for( approxParam=1.5; approxParam<=10.0; approxParam+=0.5 )
            dst_cc = cvApproxPoly(src_cc, sizeof(CvContour), temp_storage, CV_POLY_APPROX_DP, approxParam);
    }
}

for( i=0; i<10000; i++ )
{
    cv::threshold(mat_gray, mat_tmp, 225, 255, CV_THRESH_BINARY);
    cv::findContours(mat_tmp, mat_contours, hierarchy, CV_RETR_CCOMP, CV_CHAIN_APPROX_SIMPLE);

    for( ic=0; ic<mat_contours.size(); ic++ ) {
        for( approxParam=1.5; approxParam<=10.0; approxParam+=0.5 )
            cv::approxPolyDP(mat_contours[ic], dst_contour, approxParam, true);
    }
}

C++ source has a RELEASE execution time nearly 1 second greater than C source. Is it possible? Is it only C++ overhead? I have used an opencv sample image (baboon.jpg) and C source needs thereabouts 4 seconds while C++ source 5 seconds

regards Andrea

edit retag flag offensive close merge delete

Comments

nice find, but please add test code to your question. so that other folks can try to reproduce it.

(also, just saying, - 2.4.8 is before-last-years-model (not really relevant any more))

berak ( 2016-11-17 10:22:58 -0600 )edit

I have checked it with a complex application, I need to isolate some code to post it. Let me try with 2.4.13 version, then I'll give you another feedback

andreadc ( 2016-11-17 10:29:11 -0600 )edit

Hi, I have just tried with 2.4.13 version but nothing changes. I have verified that isn't only cv::findcontours to slow down, but in general all c++ function are a little slower. For example after finding contours I use several cv::approxPolyDP to try other contours approximation and also them are slower.

How could attach a source code file I have used to test it? Anyway, doing 10000 cv::findcountours over a generic sample image and then running each contour several approximations take nearly 1 seconds more than doing it with C functions. Is it possible? Is it only C++ overhead?

andreadc ( 2016-11-18 04:57:13 -0600 )edit

After checking the source code I think it is because the cv::findContours not just calls cvFindContours, but after that it also copies the whole contour array from the C structure to a C++ array which has an additional overhead.

matman ( 2016-11-18 11:44:31 -0600 )edit

And also cv::approxPolyDP allocate each time a CvMemStorage. I think I need to upgrade to 3.0 version to solve that issue, am I wrong?

andreadc ( 2016-11-21 01:18:14 -0600 )edit

add a comment

IplImage * img_stub = cvCreateImageHeader(cvSize(img1.cols, img1.rows), 8, 1); cvSetData(img_stub, img1.data, (int)img1.step); CvMemStorage* storage = cvCreateMemStorage(0); CvSeq* _contours = nullptr; cvFindContours( img_stub, storage, &_contours, sizeof(CvContour), CV_RETR_CCOMP, CV_CHAIN_APPROX_SIMPLE); cv::Seq<CvSeq*> all_contours(cvTreeToNodeSeq( _contours, sizeof(CvSeq), storage )); int i, total = (int)all_contours.size(); out.create(total, 1, 0, -1, true); cv::SeqIterator<CvSeq*> it = all_contours.begin(); for( i = 0; i < total; i++, ++it ) { CvSeq* c = *it; ((CvContour*)c)->color = (int)i; out.create((int)c->total, 1, CV_32SC2, i, true); cv::Mat ci = out.getMat(i); CV_Assert( ci.isContinuous() ); cvCvtSeqToArray(c, ci.ptr()); } cvClearMemStorage( storage ); cvReleaseMemStorage(&storage); cvReleaseImageHeader(&img_stub);

cv::findContours : 25.6760 ms cv::findContours : 12.5560 ms cv::findContours : 12.4280 ms cv::findContours : 12.3370 ms cv::findContours : 13.2180 ms cv::findContours : 12.0600 ms cv::findContours : 12.7090 ms cv::findContours : 12.0270 ms cvFindContours : 4.9750 ms cvFindContours : 5.1180 ms cvFindContours : 4.9960 ms cvFindContours : 4.9750 ms cvFindContours : 5.4470 ms cvFindContours : 4.8460 ms cvFindContours : 5.1010 ms cvFindContours : 4.9200 ms

cvFindContours is faster than cv::findcontours

Comments

1 answer

Links

Question Tools

Stats

Related questions

cvFindContours is faster than cv::findcontours edit

Comments

1 answer

Links

Question Tools

Stats

Related questions

cvFindContours is faster than cv::findcontours