You may also want to think about Pooch in order to take advantage of distributed computing and OS X's built in xgrid.
In article <1156517355.559959.55500@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>, "Rob Shaw" <rob@haptek.com> wrote:
> Thanks for the advice. It's certainly true that it's tough to beat the > human eye in image processing. And as long as there are more > people than jobs in the third world, robotics in general is not going > to be cost-effective. > > But we're doing experiments that generate dynamical patterns, > it's not a production thing, at least not yet. I'm the electronics > guy, and help with the image processing software, we have a > more-or-less working system. > > We ended up using lua as a scripting language, though still we mostly > write in C, it's maybe just as convenient with today's fast compilers. > If I were to do it again, I might look at something called "ipython", > which supposedly has a very nice shell interface, logging facilities, > etc. Lua doesn't have this, but it's so small that you can add stuff > in easily, and the user group is very helpful. It's been a time sink, > though, the jury is still out. > > A lot of people swear by Matlab, but we're more in the > reinvent-the-wheel school of thought. One thing we've done is > interface a wireless gaming joystick to our setup, so we can > focus the scope, run the stage, change filters, take pictures, > and run other equipment, all from one unit. The mac > we use works well for us, it's a 1.4 GHz dual MMD, one of the last > with a standard PCI slot. I believe the new ones exclusively use > "PCI express", cards for that standard are vvvery expensive, > if they exist at all. Maybe a linux box makes more sense if > you're starting a setup these days, but we had the mac hardware. > > Of course, the real test if is we can do any good science. > > Thanks again, > > rob > > Simon Slavin wrote: > > On 20/08/2006, madiba wrote in message > > <1hkdgwu.6akl7ukn6b9cN%down@thekraal.com>: > > > > > Rob Shaw <rob@haptek.com> wrote: > > > > > > > We are going to look through a microscope, do image processing, > > > > and depending on what we see, move the stage, or adjust other > > > > parameters, in real time. > > > > What you want is probably MatLab. It can do all the image-processing you > > want, and it can be used to control an IO card which could make the > > adjustments to the microscope you need. You will need at least one > > electronics guy to hook up the microscope and one programmer to program > > MatLab. > > > > > Sounds like you want to do automated cytology, as in PAP smears. > > > Good luck! Been there, got the T-shirt. Technology can't keep up with > > > falling market barriers and influx of cheap labor (or does your PPC + > > > software + peripherals cover its costs for little more than the > > > equivalent of a bowl of rice/day?) > > > > I think madiba is probably right for a large-scale project with many > > performances of the same task. You'd need a real microscope+computer > > setup to do this. It's cheaper to offshore it. However, if you can > > develop your idea to the point where the hardware becomes cheaper, it > > might be a player. > > > > Simon. > > -- > > http://www.hearsay.demon.co.uk
