View Full Version : Performance Frame Filter vs Image Available vs MemorySnapImage

May 14, 2014, 17:40:56
Here is a performance question: ultimately I need to grab an image with a frequency of only a 0.5 fps or even 1 fps. But in the UI I want to see more frequent camera updates. Right now, I use the ring buffer and ImageAvailable event and display every image, but save with said lower frequency.

Would it be more efficient to have the IcImagingControl continuously show the live image without using the ring buffer, and then use MemorySnapImage in certain intervals?

Or as a third approach, would it be be even better to set up a special frame filter to grab every nth image?


Stefan Geissler
May 14, 2014, 17:54:40

This depends on your used hardware. If you use a current computer, e.g. Core i3, you wont see any difference. If you use an ATOM CPU or something other really slow, then you should avoid as much as possible memory operations.

May 14, 2014, 19:48:27
Yes, I do need to run this on slow hardware. So which one of the above approaches uses the least memory ops?

Stefan Geissler
May 15, 2014, 12:10:54
Avoid copy operations, therefore, LiveCaptureContinuous should be set to false. Snap an image only, if you need one.
Also you should use lowest frame rate, if you need only 2 images per second.