|
Size: 1328
Comment:
|
Size: 1681
Comment:
|
| Deletions are marked like this. | Additions are marked like this. |
| Line 1: | Line 1: |
| 1. Make GigE camera(s) work: full resolution, high dynamic range (all the bits), lower frame rate. | 1. Make GigE camera(s) work: full resolution, high dynamic range (all the bits), lower frame rate. |
| Line 4: | Line 5: |
| 1. 2-D Fit determines beam centroid, width, and intensity | |
| Line 6: | Line 8: |
| 1. TIFF files are roughly 0.5 MB per image, plain text is roughly 3.5 MB per image 1. Normal file compression (zip compression in OS 10.5) compressed files to roughly 1/4 their original size 1. At above rate of archiving and ~15 cameras per site, this is ~90000 images for one month and another ~67000 images for each following month. To fit a year's worth of data (~827385 images) on a 1 TB drive, this requires that each image be compressed to ~1.2 MB. Thus, the basic TIFF format is reasonable but could likely be improved upon. |
|
| Line 7: | Line 14: |
| 1. 2-D Fitting is too slow, center of mass method easily fast enough but may not be accurate enough 1. Need to look into EPICS control methods |
|
| Line 10: | Line 19: |
| ---- === Cameras === Web page with a bunch of GigE camera vendors (not all support Linux): http://www.pleora.com/camera_partners/index.php |
|
| Line 14: | Line 20: |
| ---- I tried to capture frames with Snap from both cameras. It seems that the images from the 650 work less well than those from the 750 (image from the 650 is a bar across the top with some data, and then all black). While the -Exposure setting works well, there might be times in which a -Gain option is also nice. |
Subpages |
| Line 17: | Line 22: |
| I also spent a little time with the cameras on the GC network. I was able to get about 10fps from both cameras at the simultaneously. The 750 alone maxed out at 33fps, even with 200x200 image size. The 650 was able to produce 188fps with a 200x200 image size. All of this was done with the packet size set to 1024b. | GigeCameraProgramRequirements |
| Line 19: | Line 24: |
| -Matt | GigeCameraCurrentStatus GigeCameraHardware GigeCameraSurf Presentation for 6/27/08 ISC meeting: attachment:DigitalCameraStatus062708.pdf Outline for July Progress Report (6/30/08): attachment:Eric_Mintun_LIGOSURF_ProgressOutline_063008.pdf Presentation for 9/5/08 ISC meeting: attachment:CameraEvaluation.pdf |
1. Make GigE camera(s) work: full resolution, high dynamic range (all the bits), lower frame rate.
- Explore required network bandwidth: how many GigE cameras can we have on single hub?
- Some image processing: beam sizes, beam centroids, total power, diffs,...
- 2-D Fit determines beam centroid, width, and intensity
- Image archiving: 1/sec for the past 5 minutes, 1/minute for the past day, 6/hour forever
- Image compression? Just record the diffs?
- TIFF files are roughly 0.5 MB per image, plain text is roughly 3.5 MB per image
- Normal file compression (zip compression in OS 10.5) compressed files to roughly 1/4 their original size
- At above rate of archiving and ~15 cameras per site, this is ~90000 images for one month and another ~67000 images for each following month. To fit a year's worth of data (~827385 images) on a 1 TB drive, this requires that each image be compressed to ~1.2 MB. Thus, the basic TIFF format is reasonable but could likely be improved upon.
- Use TM spots to do auto-alignment.
- 2-D Fitting is too slow, center of mass method easily fast enough but may not be accurate enough
- Need to look into EPICS control methods
- Port Josh's beam scan stuff to use these cameras.
- Buy more cameras.
Subpages
Presentation for 6/27/08 ISC meeting: attachment:DigitalCameraStatus062708.pdf
Outline for July Progress Report (6/30/08): attachment:Eric_Mintun_LIGOSURF_ProgressOutline_063008.pdf
Presentation for 9/5/08 ISC meeting: attachment:CameraEvaluation.pdf