> In addition to my previous comments, wouldn't it make more sense to create a > multiplanar format for this instead of bundling the two separate images into a > single plane ?
Unfortunately that would break userspace at this point as multiple libraries are already depending on a patch that implements the INZI format in this way. I first released a work in progress patch in March of 2015. It was integrated into a Robot Operating System module shortly after that, and Intel has included it in librealsense since January, and also in the firmware for their new Joule module. Since people using this have mostly had to patch their own kernel to use it that might not be a deal breaker. I had initially held back on upstreaming it because I was trying to work out some details of the image formats. Two depth formats seemed the same, and I was trying to figure out what was different enough about them to justify having two formats. I've never had access to any intel documentation beyond what is public on their website, and many details are missing. For reference I got an early RealSense camera when only windows was supported, and figured out some rudimentary support for Linux over a year before intel released their own support. A manager hiring for Intel's open source library told me over the phone that they were in fact using my blog posts to help them develop it so it wasn't surprising that the patch they distributed with the library included my comments. It was surprising that they didn't mention me as the author of the patch. I could rebase my original patch on the current development kernel and submit it if that helps. I can reformat the useful bits from my blog posts as documentation on how 3d cameras work. I wrote a C hotplug utility to let the kernel know about non standard camera controls. I also have a partially finished kernel driver for the SR300, and F200 cameras for things like retrieving the calibration to turn depth images into point clouds, putting the camera into firmware update mode, etc that intel's library does with libusb. I think there should be a standard v4l2 api for 3d cameras because as it is now userspace programs have to be written differently for each vendor. Really all they need are some calibration matrices, and distortion coefficients. Precise time synchronization between /dev/videoX nodes would also be really helpful. These two things would be helpful for other cameras as well for things like stitching 360 degree video. Here are links to my blog series. http://solsticlipse.com/2015/01/09/intel-real-sense-camera-on-linux.html http://solsticlipse.com/2015/02/10/intel-real-sense-on-linux-part-2-3d-camera-controls.html http://solsticlipse.com/2015/03/31/intel-real-sense-3d-on-linux-macos.html http://solsticlipse.com/2016/09/26/long-road-to-ubiquitous-3d-cameras.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
