Re: video capture library

by capture if u mean storing every frame as an image, havent we done that already (7th sem) using ffmpeg?

Prateek

On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 8:23 PM, Sayandeep Purkayasth <deepcyan@gmail.com> wrote:

what say we use ffmpeg this time?
if so, find appropriate tutorials http://www.inb.uni-luebeck.de/~boehme/using_libavcodec.html (outdated code) and http://www.dranger.com/ffmpeg/tutorial01.html (not checked yet)

On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 4:44 PM, Sayandeep Purkayasth <deepcyan@gmail.com> wrote:

one promising one

• Simple, Thread-safe Approximate Nearest Neighbor (STANN) C++
  

video capture library

what say we use ffmpeg this time?
if so, find appropriate tutorials http://www.inb.uni-luebeck.de/~boehme/using_libavcodec.html (outdated code) and http://www.dranger.com/ffmpeg/tutorial01.html (not checked yet)

On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 4:44 PM, Sayandeep Purkayasth <deepcyan@gmail.com> wrote:

one promising one

• Simple, Thread-safe Approximate Nearest Neighbor (STANN) C++
  

Re: the clustering search

one promising one

• Simple, Thread-safe Approximate Nearest Neighbor (STANN) C++
  

the clustering search

some libraries for clustering and (in general) for machine learning are listed below

• SGI MLC++ http://www.sgi.com/tech/mlc/
• OpenCV MLL
• The Open Source C Clustering Library
• The Wikipedia-Clustering project
• a specialized K-means library from The University of Mariland

these and some others to be looked up.

MTP discussions

one optimization technique springs to mind:

we can break up the initial 2d array into lots of small 2d arrays and optimise each each separately. then we can stitch them back. this can probably give better results.

MTP discussions

in section 4.1 of the paper, the authors say they used a sparse variant of the levenberg marquardt algo. the levmar site (http://www.ics.forth.gr/~lourakis/levmar/) you found earlier is exactly that. i don't think gsl wala has sparse matrix support. so will switch to levmar.

para3dhwt

Its been a snail's pace thanks to arbit errors and the debugging involved. We have adopted the modular approach making separate files for all the functions involved, keeping the related ones in the same file. What it has cost us at a speed of around 0.25x for just 3dhwt is a time of around 15 seconds for a 100 frame chunk. Thats at least better than the 38 minutes it once took! I seriously wish this gives a good compression over the usual stuff for all the time its taking... and this was just for order 1 wavelets! Well, we do have some optimizations already in mind; leaving apart the init 2 without X and gdm that we have come down to.

We have a few major hurdles to overcome though - one is the time factor, this time meaning the deadline for the BTP after which it is as good as dead; a second staring us in the face is the disappearance of nodes from the cluster owing to the upgradation of the lab that's going on... No we still won't be given the new ThinkSmarts to work on and no we (=>at least I) don't intend to appeal either for it'll mean wasting another weekend over installation of the components.