I am thinking about buying an SDK license for multiple cams, but seeing a lack of response to Processing problems with this sdk, which goes back several months, I wonder, if I should even consider buying this SDK.

Any experience with support of the purchased licenses out there?

Thanks.

Hi Eight,

I would say support for the licenses is pretty good, I’ve come across a few issues when using the SDK and drivers and all seem to be resolved with relatively quick turn around. I would say the first port of call is the forum for support issues. It usually turns up some good results.

This is just my experience with the SDK so far.

Khaled

kshaaban - 16 October 2010 05:58 AM

Hi Eight,

I would say support for the licenses is pretty good, I’ve come across a few issues when using the SDK and drivers and all seem to be resolved with relatively quick turn around. I would say the first port of call is the forum for support issues. It usually turns up some good results.

This is just my experience with the SDK so far.

Khaled

Thanks! Were you able to resolve the problems with processing or java examples?

-8

I’m using C++ and haven’t really looked into the processing.org libraries. Ive just realised that’s what your initial question was regarding.

Cant say I can help with that. My understanding of Java is limited to say the least.

-K

kshaaban - 16 October 2010 08:12 AM

I’m using C++ and haven’t really looked into the processing.org libraries. Ive just realised that’s what your initial question was regarding.

Cant say I can help with that. My understanding of Java is limited to say the least.

-K

Yes, I was interested in sdk mostly because it seemed to offer the capture in java (one can easily port processing into pure java).

-8

Hey eight,

Sorry been a bit hectic around here with CL Studio release, I highly recommend trying out the processing.org examples in the SDK and testing before you scale… we provide the full JNI and class source so should be no problem to get working (even if processing.org has updated)... To my knowledge many of the old issues were directed towards an older version of the library and I believe our latest SDK should have resolved many older topics.

Thanks and please let us know how it goes.

KrisM - 16 October 2010 10:34 PM

Hey eight,

..I believe our latest SDK should have resolved many older topics.

Thanks and please let us know how it goes.

Hi KrisM,

I tried the latest SDK and processing 1.2.1 and an older processing release (don’t remember which one). Please see my observations here: http://codelaboratories.com/forums/viewthread/68/P30/#1248 .

Thanks for looking into this.

-8

KrisM - 16 October 2010 10:34 PM

Hey eight,

Sorry been a bit hectic around here with CL Studio release, I highly recommend trying out the processing.org examples in the SDK and testing before you scale… we provide the full JNI and class source so should be no problem to get working (even if processing.org has updated)... To my knowledge many of the old issues were directed towards an older version of the library and I believe our latest SDK should have resolved many older topics.

Thanks and please let us know how it goes.

Hi KrisM,

Somebody kindly sent me a link to an older SDK CL-Eye-Platform-SDK-1.0.1.0109.exe, from which I was able to extract a CLEyeMulticam.dll. This older dll worked on my Windows 7 64 bit machine in Processing example with two cams.

However, this old dll does not work with the current SDK (I get a gray view).

So the question is two fold:

1) Can Code Laboratories fix the current SDK, using the older SDK as an example, for processing?
2) If the answer to first question is NO, what would be a scale up path, which uses this old, but working DLL?

Thanks.

—8

Hey 8,

Thanks for your patiences with this issue,

There is no reason we can’t have full native support again in the latest processing.org (I personally used it alot 2 months ago), As this is most likely a migration bug with the processing.org examples,  we have done some updates to CL Eye for the CL Studio release and may have caused issues in our JNI wrapper. I’ll talk to Alex and note any feedback as far as changes in APIs… but to my knowledge nothing major.

So to answer… its a Yes on the we can get working and we would recommend using the older SDK for now until we patch.

Cheers

Will I be able to scale, say, to 8 cameras, using old sdk?

Thanks.