Hi Matt, i worked a lot with frame grabbers of all kinds. OpenCV did a very good job in terms of performance. But of course, the OpenCV VideoCapture API abstracts completely from the underlying hardware. If you want to change something hardware-specific, you would have to use the appropriate driver SDK. Depending on the SDK, it's not a big deal. I implemented it for Unigraf grabbers to be able to change driver settings. Afterwards I just converted the raw frame data into OpenCV format (BGRA, flipping - by the way: why do they all do it differently?) and proceeded with image processing using OpenCV functions. Rendering in MITK was then done using the OpenCVVideoSupport module which basically paints the frame texture into a Renderwindow's background. Gives great performance, but of course you are completely decoupled from any geometry system (which might be necessary for e.g. tracked ultrasound).
Bye Michael -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Clarkson, Matt [mailto:m.clark...@ucl.ac.uk] Gesendet: Freitag, 18. September 2015 15:21 An: Sebastian Ordas <sebastian.or...@gmail.com> Cc: MITK <mitk-users@lists.sourceforge.net> Betreff: Re: [mitk-users] Generic Video Interface Hi, yeah, I have used PLUS, and they support a lot of tracker, ultrasound and video devices, and could stream data via OpenIGTLink into MITK, which is all great! (Thanks to all the people involved). But, I'm thinking that if you have stereo, RGB(A), HD video (1920x1080), then you don't want to do this over a network connection, so a direct interface would be better? So, (a) networked via OpenIGTLink and (b) direct, for both ultrasound and video are all valid use-cases depending on performance requirements. Matt > On 18 Sep 2015, at 14:06, Sebastian Ordas <sebastian.or...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Matt, have you looked into Plus? they support Ultrasonix and a couple > more US devices > http://perk-software.cs.queensu.ca/plus/doc/nightly/user/Devices.html > The easiest would be to send the video stream (and synchronized > tracking data if you want) from PlusServer via OpenIGTLink to your > mitk-based application There is already in MITK (working branch > bug-17944-OpenIGTLinkPluginForUltrasound) a class > mitkImageToIGTLMessageFilter you will need to implement the other way round: > e.g. mitk::IGTLMessageToImageFilter Alfred, any other hint for connecting > MITK with Plus? Is anyone interested in joining efforts on this? > > regards, > sebastian > > On 17/09/2015 12:24 p.m., Clarkson, Matt wrote: >> Would anyone be interested in Ultrasonix? > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ mitk-users mailing list mitk-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mitk-users ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ mitk-users mailing list mitk-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mitk-users
