You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I am currently using this awesome package to try to implement a video-based diarization of speakers. To do so, I accessed the facial landmarks. Surprisingly, I got them in the typical range of image pixels, though they are represented as a list of NormalizedPointOfInterest2D.
Indeed, inspecting the FaceDetector in the detect script (lines 570 to 691), it looks like facial landmarks are published as non-normalized integers. Below is a subset of those lines, for the sake of readability.
defmake_facial_landmarks_msg(self, detection, img_height, img_width):
# PoI = Points of Interestpoi= [
NormalizedPointOfInterest2D(
int(detection.landmark[ros4hri_to_mediapipe[idx]].x*img_width),
int(detection.landmark[ros4hri_to_mediapipe[idx]].y*img_height),
1,
)
foridxinrange(68)
]
and below are the values that I get when looking into a /humans/faces/<face_id>/landmarks, again cropped for conciseness
Hi!
I am currently using this awesome package to try to implement a video-based diarization of speakers. To do so, I accessed the facial landmarks. Surprisingly, I got them in the typical range of image pixels, though they are represented as a list of
NormalizedPointOfInterest2D
.Indeed, inspecting the
FaceDetector
in thedetect
script (lines 570 to 691), it looks like facial landmarks are published as non-normalized integers. Below is a subset of those lines, for the sake of readability.and below are the values that I get when looking into a
/humans/faces/<face_id>/landmarks
, again cropped for concisenessIs this the intended behavior? Or should the landmarks be published in the [0.0 1.0] range?
Thank you in advance!
I will be happy to contribute with a PR on this if you confirm me that this has to change.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: