Skip to content

Conversation

@mickp
Copy link
Collaborator

@mickp mickp commented Jan 13, 2020

Needs testing with hardware

An alternative implementation for #121, replacing #124.

The camera is augmented with methods to do data processing and return the correct image shape depending on processing mode. Camera parameters are passed as a dict, to avoid the dot-notation problem discussed in #124.

@mickp mickp requested a review from NickHallPhysics January 13, 2020 15:46
@mickp
Copy link
Collaborator Author

mickp commented Jan 13, 2020

@NickHallONBI - can you test this with the hardware when you get a chance?

@iandobbie
Copy link
Collaborator

Testing today on the cryo Aurox setup appears to work.

One problem is the docstring..

Config sample:
device(microscope.filterwheels.aurox.Clarity,
{'camera': 'microscope.Cameras.cameramodule.SomeCamera',
'camera.someSetting': value})

The camera module is a python object not a string so shouldn't be in quotes.

@carandraug
Copy link
Collaborator

I started looking into this and merge into master but then noticed that while we import ClarityProcessor we then call clarity_process.ClarityProcessor. So has this actually been tested? What really have people been running?

@iandobbie
Copy link
Collaborator

Exactly my question. We should merge what works and close the other issues.

dstoychev pushed a commit to dstoychev/microscope that referenced this pull request Nov 3, 2020
dstoychev pushed a commit to dstoychev/microscope that referenced this pull request Dec 15, 2020
dstoychev pushed a commit to dstoychev/microscope that referenced this pull request Dec 15, 2020
dstoychev pushed a commit to dstoychev/microscope that referenced this pull request Dec 15, 2020
dstoychev pushed a commit to dstoychev/microscope that referenced this pull request Dec 15, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants