Author Topic: Helmet Cam Link - Any Good?  (Read 1751 times)

PilotSniper

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 319
  • Karma: 0
    • View Profile
Helmet Cam Link - Any Good?
« on: February 17, 2004, 08:17:16 PM »
Guys, I ran across this link tonight and thought about posting it in the forum. Then, I thought it might be too expensive or just not a good enough overall product. Before we get the "what a piece of junk" or "it's too expensive" replies that really aren't productive for the site, what are your thoughts on it? Also, if you think it's worthwhile, should it be posted to the forums? Should we have a topic that contains information on various types/styles/models of these miniature cameras?

I haven't started educating myself in the miniature camera arena yet, so I'm pretty much clueless when it comes to these types of things.

As usual, just thinking out loud! :?

Here's the link: http://www.actionsportscams.com/
I started out with nothing and I still have most of it left!  :shock:

MassOdy

  • Guest
Helmet Cam Link - Any Good?
« Reply #1 on: February 18, 2004, 06:10:08 AM »
I've been dabbling with cheapos for a while.

Would like to buy a decent camera. The C-Mount type with interchangable
lens is the way to go. But, they are too much in the grand scheme.

Areas of my concern are Field of View without fish eying
with a Low Lux auto shutter.

Another way to approach this is to try and find out the camera
CCD element they are using. Then I look up the chips capabilities.

I like that site since they have a lot of sample video.

I've been taking apart the X10 wireless cameras and wiring long
cables to them. Need to make a mount next. Its on my arm long list
of things to do.

Some of the cheap PC cameras FROM a few years back make good
specimens. :) The Sun Workstation Camera is a great camera. But its the size
of a cigarette pack. So it would be chassis mounted.

ludedude

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1478
  • Karma: 0
    • View Profile
Helmet Cam Link - Any Good?
« Reply #2 on: February 18, 2004, 06:18:44 AM »
I'm going to move this thread out to and make section for video under general technical. It's on my list of to do's too :) Mass, keep uis updated, if you find a way to go, a good product...let me know, I'll look INTO GROUP buy potential. List some good used cameras that we can look for..I have a few surplus contacts...maybe I can get a bunch, but I have no idea what to look for....

A lot of guys are getting INTO this, so let's go at this together. If we can settle on what we want...there's always savings in numbers :)

MassOdy

  • Guest
Helmet Cam Link - Any Good?
« Reply #3 on: February 18, 2004, 10:34:54 AM »
We need a camera that has composite video outputs. Most all cameras (recording device) that allow recording FROM an external source will support composite video.

Better yet is S video. It splits the signal INTO two components. Luminense (Brightness) and Chrominance (color) which allows for amuch better signal at the recording device. They are sent on two seperate wires within the S Video cable.

Cameras with built in Mics are great since they already have a line level output for the audio.
Otherwise we will need to but an mic amplifier on in line to the recording device.

The signal specs to look for is the lines of resolution. The more lines the better the picture.
This will allow us to capture as best as we can so that whent he video is compressed its still
decent.

Also, if they state the totla number of pixels in teh CCD element thats very important. Along
with the square area of the CCD.

On that thought you want to compress as few times as possible. I recompressed Hare's video last night. The best thing to have done would have been take the original DV file which is
essentially progressive scan like video and compress it to the desired output type. If you want multiple output types always go back to the original and compress again with the new compression attributes. (ie. MPEG4 versus RealVideo)

Also keep in mind that even though a file may be an .AVI file the inside properties of the content may be different and is for different AVI files. Ie. audio quality, video color depth....)

Oops strayed a bit FROM the camera talk.

We can't forget focal length, light gathering potential and so forth but thats the attributes of the lens which is just as if not more important thatn the ccd elements.

ludedude

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1478
  • Karma: 0
    • View Profile
Helmet Cam Link - Any Good?
« Reply #4 on: February 18, 2004, 10:56:57 AM »
So camera look for:
S video input
built in mic
higher lines of resolution
higher pixel count in CCD
larger area of CCD

camcorder needs external input...S video
any other criteria?

compressing we should get set up sp that we come up with a common encoding settings...I know what you mean about adifferent avi settings. My capture via firewire is in avi,if Itake the exact capture video and encode to avi...it's comes out a lot smaller file size...loosing something. Is there a way to capture to the original spec after you edit the crap out so that you can just encode your edited piece to various types, with out going back to the original and re-editing for each video output type. Maybe we just settle on th best output type...file size vs quality.....quality being more important...and go FROM there.

?????

MassOdy

  • Guest
Helmet Cam Link - Any Good?
« Reply #5 on: February 18, 2004, 11:10:12 AM »
the wish list of specs is going to be hard to find. But worth looking for.
For instance I haven't found a decent camera with S Video outputs otherthan
a real home video camera.

Yes camcorder needs appropriate input selections. Or a video walkman like Hare.

So you DV files that are .avi filenames. Are huge right. Good those are the original
full frame capture as you set it when you originally pulled the film INTO the computer.

We should as a whole maybe decide as you say on a common format.

I would say start with the video size and we can work FROM there. I liked Hare's video FROM last night. Thanks Hare!

I'll try and recompress those to be not so large and have the audio in there too. Not bad for 66MB to < 20 MB. I'm at a loss as to why the MAC F'd me on the audio tracks. And it was midnight already. When I get my machine upto XP I'll try this on my PC instead of the MAC. I have the software already. But, it requires XP.

Sound format we can play with the settings too. If its a mono mic input then we should choose
mono in the codec process. Likewise if the fidelity of the sound is not that great then DROP the sound to 8 bit instead of 16 bit. Or 22 khz instead of 44 khz and so forth.

I'll look again for a sample set of files tha tmaybe we can post as examples of codec types.