User defined name? (user_id)

Hi all,

I have a TIS camera and their “camera-ip-conf” allows me to set a “user defined name”, which would be very useful to us. My question is - can I somehow access this name from Aravis, when doing camera discovery? It seems it is read out and stored as the user_id field of ArvGvInterfaceDeviceInfo in arvgvinterface.c, but I was not able to quickly find a accessor function that exposes this (say in the ArvInterface API).

If there is a way to get that, could you please point me to it? If not, is there a reason for it (presumably something like user_id not being general enought because it does not exist in USB3 cameras?)




There is no accessor to this value yet. I guess it is also supported by USB3Vision, but I don’t know if it is part of the device description data than can be accessed without the Genicam data. If so, the index for it can be probably retrieved by reverse engineering.

It is nevertheless possible to instantiate a device using this user id.


The index for user defined name is defined in NI usb3vision driver:

Please open a feature request on github. Of course a patch is also welcome !



OK, thanks, I’m willing to contribute a patch, although I’m pretty busy right now, so it’s not something that’s going to happen tomorrow, and I do not have a USB3 camera for testing.

Is my understanding correct that I would basically just need to have a look at how, say, arv_get_device_serial_nbr or arv_interface_get_device_serial_nb work and implement arv_get_device_user_defined_name and arv_interface_get_device_user_defined_name accordingly?

Although, for USB3, there would need to be something added under the hood, I assume (using the index you referenced above).

Let’s name the function arv_get_device_user_id and arv_interface_get_device_user, in order to match the corresponding feature name in the Genicam Standard Feature Naming Convention.

As for the USB3 implementation, have a look at how the GUID is retrieved.


just to clarify: you mean “arv_interface_get_device_user_id” here, too, correct?

Yes, sure.