search

OndroNR / aforge

Automatically exported from code.google.com/p/aforge
Other
0 stars 0 forks source link

VideoCaptureDevice.DesiredFrameSize Behaves Inconsistently #188

Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Environment: AForge.NET 2.1.5, Visual Studio 2010, Windows 7 Ultimate 64 bit, 
Microsoft LifeCam Show

What steps will reproduce the problem?

1. In the Player sample, add "videoSource.DesiredFrameSize = new Size(800, 
600);" in MainForm.localVideoCaptureDeviceToolStripMenuItem_Click() before the 
call to OpenVideoSource().

2. In project properties, set the "Platform target" to "Any CPU".

3. Run and observe that the frame size is 800 by 600.

4. Now, change the "Platform target" to "x86".

5. Run and observe that the frame size is now 352 by 288.

VideoCaptureDevice.VideoCapabilities includes 800 by 600 in both cases.

Not sure if anything can be done in AForge.NET.  This might be a DirectShow or 
LifeCam Show issue, but I figured I'd submit it just in case.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by akhu...@gmail.com on 6 Mar 2011 at 7:36

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Well, you right - hard to do anything if all these values are reported by 
DirectShow ... Since we do nothing extra in AFoge, but just wrap DirectShow.

Will see if there is something (however doubt about it) ...

Original comment by andrew.k...@gmail.com on 8 Apr 2011 at 8:52

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

Original comment by andrew.k...@gmail.com on 8 Apr 2011 at 8:54

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Try building AForge.Video.DirectShow from latest sources. There was a fix done 
for MS LifeCame, so hopefully it will work.

Let me know if you need any help in building the code.

Original comment by andrew.k...@gmail.com on 30 Apr 2011 at 7:44

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
I just reran my original test using 2.1.5 to confirm the reported behavior.  
Then, I downloaded r1444, compiled, changed my test references, and retried.  
After step 4, the frame size is now 800 by 600 for x86.

Thank you very much, Andrew!  You do great work.

Original comment by akhu...@gmail.com on 2 May 2011 at 1:40

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Thank you for the test. Now the issue can be closed then ;)

Original comment by andrew.k...@gmail.com on 2 May 2011 at 1:43

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

Original comment by andrew.k...@gmail.com on 28 Jul 2011 at 9:45

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

Original comment by andrew.k...@gmail.com on 10 Aug 2011 at 9:27