Actually a $50 web cam and the right software would be a very good
solution to this problem.
On Sat, 2002-12-21 at 10:09, Paul M Foster wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 20, 2002 at 09:36:22PM -0500, Larry Sanders wrote:
>
> > - then write routines that sample and process the data
> > for recognition of a passing fish. It will be hard to code
> > a solution before you know the data pattern.
>
> <snip>
>
> I am not an engineer, but I'd have to agree with Larry. You'll never
> know how to code this until you see the pattern of the data in action.
> It will have to be heuristic. You look at a graph of the data, code to
> that, and run the test again, on a predetermined number of fish. Code
> to that, until you get a reasonably accurate result. I can fully imagine
> fish going down the sleuce, but I can't imagine how to count them unless
> I either a) slow the whole thing down so that only one fish gets through
> at a time, or b) examine and test various known data sets as I code.
>
> I think you mentioned how "commercial" solutions for this problem were
> expensive? This may be the reason why. If I had unlimited funds to do
> something like this, I'd probably use a grid of lasers. Or maybe
> gravitic mass detectors. Or possibly force field perturbation anomaly
> encoders. Using positronic neural nets, of course. ;-}
>
> Paul
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 19:46:45 EDT