Created shape generator in simulation module #895

mschoeler · 2014-09-09T19:23:29Z

This pull-request is the second part of my GSOC 2014 project.

Adds the shape generator to PCL within the simulation module.
Added simulation to doxygen generation
Added an example under pcl_example_shape_generator.
Added two tools, generate_shape and convert2pcd
- generate_shape uses instructions found in text files to assemble scenes and objects
- convert2pcd can read stl and obj file and samples on the faces with a given point density and saves a pcd file (unlike obj2pcd it samples on faces rather than on the vertices, allowing constant point density).

taketwo · 2014-10-08T09:03:11Z

simulation/include/pcl/simulation/shape_generator_base.h

+      * \author Markus Schoeler ([email protected])
+      * \ingroup simulation
+      */
+    struct EIGEN_ALIGN16 PointXYZLNormal


@jspricke Would it make sense to promote this to the default collection of point types?

Makes sense :).

Should we have PointXYZLNormal or PointXYZRGBLNormal as a common point type? The latter will get quite large, although the RGB fields could proof useful in other scenarios.

As far as I can see PCL uses a float[4] padding in PointXYZINormal for the data anyway. So I guess using curvature, label and rgb would actually take the same amount of space as curvature and label?!?

So I guess using curvature, label and rgb would actually take the same amount of space as curvature and label

Yes, you are right. Though the fact that it is possible to add other fields does not necessarily mean that this is ought to be done. I would say let's wait until we face those other scenarios that need the complex type. But this particular contribution only needs PointXYZLNormal.

taketwo · 2014-10-16T08:39:15Z

simulation/include/pcl/simulation/shape_generator_base.h

+          * \note Templated function which copies only the fields available in out_cloud. Possible fields are x, y, z, label and normals.
+          */
+        template <typename PointOutType> inline void
+        getCloud (typename pcl::PointCloud<PointOutType> &out_cloud) const


Isn't getCloudConstPtr() already sufficient? Someone who needs a deep copy can always invoke copyPointCloud() by himself...

@taketwo: Actually I reconsidered your comment about generate returning the cloud. I think it would make the interface much more comprehensive and also save memory as the shape classes would just consist of lighweight functions instead of dynamically allocated objects like pointclouds . Also that way we do not need the getCloud.. and copyPointCloud functions at all.
However this would prevent transforming the generated clouds afterwards, which I guess is not so important anyway. It should not be too much work to do this.

taketwo · 2014-10-16T09:23:09Z

Could you please change the type of uint variables (breaks compilation on VS, see #955)? For example, in loops like for (uint cs1 = 0; cs1 < shapes_ptrs_.size (); ++cs1) it's appropriate to use size_t, because this is precisely what size() returns.

Added the tool generate_shape and the example pcl_example_shape_generator Added simulation to doxygen generation Added ply, obj and stl file sampler under tools convert2pcd Changed the interface to the shape generator. generate will return a shared pointer. Removed other pointcloud getter functions. Shapes are now lightweight classes (mainly functions) and pointclouds are generated, but not stored in the class.

Comonk · 2016-06-16T15:39:59Z

There may be an error while generating the surface normals of the torus. I used the algorithm to create a test dataset and attached at each point the normal. The result is seen in the picture below.

By changing the two values of y and z of the normals. The result seems to be more accurate:

SergioRAgostinho · 2016-08-22T17:33:18Z

This is a nice "hidden gem" in the closet. :) I know it's been some time since you contributed this, but I still have to ask,

Merge conflict (mandatory)

Can you rebase this post our 1.8.1 release?

Unit tests (mandatory)

I've noticed you haven't submitted any unit tests with your code, although I'm sure you must have used something to validade its output. Could you please submit that as well.

Tutorial (optional)

Although not required and fully aware that you already submitted an example, it would be great if you could submit also a tutorial similar to this, very very briefly explaining the purpose of the simulation module and showcasing the capabilities of the functionalities you added. It really helps to promote your contribution as users tend to explore the tutorials, not really the repository. Especially considering it's probably going to be the first simulation tutorial :)

Thanks a lot for this 👍

mschoeler · 2016-09-17T10:28:40Z

Hey Sergio, sorry for not replying earlier. I will try to work on it when I get some time. When is the release date for 1.9?
Cheers,
Markus

SergioRAgostinho · 2017-11-22T23:36:54Z

Hey Markus. I'm really sorry for replying so late! I didn't reply the moment I received the notification and since this PR is so old and I don't come to "this section" very often, I forgot about it. :(

We released 1.8.1 in June this year and now we're incorporating all new features for 1.9.0. If you feel like you have some extra time at some point, we can now start working slowly into merging this.

stale · 2018-01-22T00:26:54Z

This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it hasn't had
any activity in the past 60 days. Commenting or adding a new commit to the
pull request will revert this.

Come back whenever you have time. We look forward to your contribution.

stale · 2018-03-26T23:11:40Z

This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it hasn't had
any activity in the past 60 days. Commenting or adding a new commit to the
pull request will revert this.

Come back whenever you have time. We look forward to your contribution.

stale · 2020-02-21T20:43:29Z

This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it hasn't had
any activity in the past 60 days. Commenting or adding a new commit to the
pull request will revert this.

Come back whenever you have time. We look forward to your contribution.

mschoeler force-pushed the shape_generator branch 2 times, most recently from 151816e to 0911f66 Compare September 10, 2014 15:35

taketwo added this to the pcl-1.8.0 milestone Sep 10, 2014

mschoeler force-pushed the shape_generator branch from 0911f66 to 46fb655 Compare September 12, 2014 13:24

taketwo reviewed Oct 8, 2014
View reviewed changes

mschoeler force-pushed the shape_generator branch 2 times, most recently from 9e07ed9 to 5e15e11 Compare October 14, 2014 09:05

mschoeler mentioned this pull request Oct 16, 2014

Added Pointtype PointXYZLNormal to common #962

Merged

mschoeler force-pushed the shape_generator branch 2 times, most recently from ae8add6 to fc20a32 Compare October 16, 2014 08:06

taketwo reviewed Oct 16, 2014
View reviewed changes

mschoeler force-pushed the shape_generator branch 2 times, most recently from 8bd7a83 to c0d44cb Compare October 16, 2014 13:33

mschoeler force-pushed the shape_generator branch 2 times, most recently from d13ac1c to c75ba9f Compare December 5, 2014 13:16

mschoeler force-pushed the shape_generator branch from c75ba9f to 0b3422d Compare February 19, 2015 10:01

mschoeler mentioned this pull request Jun 3, 2015

PLY reader is not working #720

Closed

taketwo removed this from the pcl-1.8.0 milestone Oct 11, 2015

SergioRAgostinho added the needs: code review Specify why not closed/merged yet label Aug 22, 2016

SergioRAgostinho added this to the pcl-1.9.0 milestone Aug 22, 2016

SergioRAgostinho added needs: author reply Specify why not closed/merged yet and removed needs: code review Specify why not closed/merged yet labels Aug 22, 2016

stale bot added the status: stale label Jan 22, 2018

SergioRAgostinho removed this from the pcl-1.9.0 milestone Jan 25, 2018

stale bot removed the status: stale label Jan 25, 2018

stale bot added the status: stale label Mar 26, 2018

kunaltyagi removed the stale label Feb 27, 2020

stale bot removed the status: stale label Feb 27, 2020

taketwo added the status: stale label Feb 29, 2020

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Created shape generator in simulation module #895

Created shape generator in simulation module #895

mschoeler commented Sep 9, 2014

taketwo Oct 8, 2014

jspricke Oct 8, 2014

mschoeler Oct 9, 2014

mschoeler Oct 9, 2014

taketwo Oct 15, 2014

taketwo Oct 16, 2014

mschoeler Dec 4, 2014

taketwo commented Oct 16, 2014

Comonk commented Jun 16, 2016

SergioRAgostinho commented Aug 22, 2016

mschoeler commented Sep 17, 2016

SergioRAgostinho commented Nov 22, 2017

stale bot commented Jan 22, 2018

stale bot commented Mar 26, 2018

stale bot commented Feb 21, 2020

Created shape generator in simulation module #895

Are you sure you want to change the base?

Created shape generator in simulation module #895

Conversation

mschoeler commented Sep 9, 2014

taketwo Oct 8, 2014

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

jspricke Oct 8, 2014

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

mschoeler Oct 9, 2014

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

mschoeler Oct 9, 2014

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

taketwo Oct 15, 2014

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

taketwo Oct 16, 2014

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

mschoeler Dec 4, 2014

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

taketwo commented Oct 16, 2014

Comonk commented Jun 16, 2016

SergioRAgostinho commented Aug 22, 2016

Merge conflict (mandatory)

Unit tests (mandatory)

Tutorial (optional)

mschoeler commented Sep 17, 2016

SergioRAgostinho commented Nov 22, 2017

stale bot commented Jan 22, 2018

stale bot commented Mar 26, 2018

stale bot commented Feb 21, 2020