Why can’t you buy a good webcam? • Hacker News Board

Re: Why can’t you buy a good webcam?

#481

Post by okr » Tue, Dec 22, 2020, 4:42 PM UTC

simonh wrote: post #433

Firadeoclus wrote: post #405

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And while there is certainly room for improvement with typical webcams: the problem is in many cases not the camera, but the conditions under which it operates. Low light, shooting against the light, smeared laptop lenses, weird angles (not eye level), weird perspective framing, bad combination of light and framerates, mixed light temperatures, low CRI lighting, etc. If you take an 40k€ Arri and a 20k€ Zeiss Prime…

The problem is laptop lids are a lot thinner than smartphones and just don't have the depth to contain a decent optic. Apple have tried to mitigate this a bit in the new M1 machines using some computational photography to improve the image. The Surface machines from Microsoft actually stand out in this regard. Because the brains of the machine are in the same section as the screen and camera, they are a lot thicker a…

My laptop lid is as thick as my smartphone. I think there is enough space. I think the technology from smart phones has not swept over to laptop lids yet.

Re: Why can’t you buy a good webcam?

#482

Post by Joeri » Tue, Dec 22, 2020, 4:43 PM UTC

em500 wrote: post #321

pembrook wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s literally no good monitors with the proper resolution for MacOS outside of the fragile LG ultrafine line. It doesn’t matter how much money you throw at the problem, nobody is making 27” 5k displays right now.

What does "proper resolution for MacOS" mean in this case? There are tons of 27" 4k that work fine in macOS in Retina mode and matches the medium tier iMac (their low end today is still 21.5" 1080p). Unless you declare everything below 5k subpar, I don't see where you're coming from.

This article from 2016 explains the problem: https://bjango.com/articles/macexternaldisplays/

Basically, the ideal PPI of mac displays is a multiple of 110 PPI. So, for retina quality you need a display of roughly 220 PPI, which is what you get from 5K at 27 inch. A 27 inch 4K display is around 160 PPI. If you use that in 2x mode, things will appear too large. If you set it to scaled mode to make things appear the proper size, there are display artifacts (like shimmering when scrolling). In fairness, it's not super obvious unless you know what to look for. But if you're already spending money on a high end screen, why should you have to compromise?

Re: Why can’t you buy a good webcam?

#483

Post by greedo » Tue, Dec 22, 2020, 4:43 PM UTC

pembrook wrote: post #291

manderley wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are tons of expensive monitors available that cater to the professional market. The whole premise is not based in reality. Apple simply has the highest mindshare among average products.

There’s literally no good monitors with the proper resolution for MacOS outside of the fragile LG ultrafine line. It doesn’t matter how much money you throw at the problem, nobody is making 27” 5k displays right now.

What's extremely frustrating is that Apple makes an excellent 27" 5K monitor in a nice housing for $1800. The only problem is that it comes with an iMac...

So clearly, Apple could sell a monitor for about $1600, that would be perfectly compatible with Mac Pros, mac mini and as a secondary monitor for all the various MacBooks.

Re: Why can’t you buy a good webcam?

#484

Post by GekkePrutser » Tue, Dec 22, 2020, 4:45 PM UTC

I really wish a webcam could be embedded inside the screen (like the under-display front cams that are just appearing on mobiles). Being able to actually look someone in the eye instead of staring down would be great.

I was even thinking of making something like a teleprompter with a semi mirror but it becomes too bulky :)

Re: Why can’t you buy a good webcam?

#485

Post by perardi » Tue, Dec 22, 2020, 4:45 PM UTC

marta_morena_9 wrote: post #439

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #329

The real reason is buried in the article: You can’t buy a good webcam because the number of people willing to pay a lot of money for a high end webcam is very small. At the lower end, people are satisfied with their built in laptop parts or a cheap webcam that sits on top of their monitor. At the high end, people go down the rabbit hole of buying a do-everything mirrorless camera that they can use for so much more th…

This doesn't make any sense. Mirrorless cameras cost a couple thousand dollars (I have one) and the last thing I am going to wear down/abuse this equipment with, is to jump into daily meeting lol. At the low end, there are decent webcams, like Logitech HD 1080p, but it costs over 100$ and honestly, it's a couple of years behind the current. There don't seem to be webcams of around 100 to 200$ that are state of the ar…

I actually did run my Fuji camera as a webcam for a Q&A at work. 35mm f/1.4 with a ring light left me looking downright pretty if I do say so myself.

https://imgur.com/7CxnRLK

Re: Why can’t you buy a good webcam?

#486

Post by gsich » Tue, Dec 22, 2020, 4:48 PM UTC

lmilcin wrote: post #41

If you are looking here to improve your webcam because you started to do remote work, don't. First try to improve lighting and audio. Any camera will look bad in bad lighting. It is always better to first improve your lighting before you invest in a new camera. Use high CRI lightbulbs and ensure even source color temperature in your room (ie. all lightbulbs should be emitting same color temperature). Audio is also ve…

Not just subconsciously. If people have a shitty microphone I have more work to do. I need to listen more carefully.

Re: Why can’t you buy a good webcam?

#487

Post by est31 » Tue, Dec 22, 2020, 4:50 PM UTC

postalrat wrote: post #371

izacus wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most likely because most of the difference is in the Qualcomm DSP attached to your phones SoC, not the actual camera module. The mobile phone images contain a lot of postprocessing which the webcams don't do.

Include the DSP then. You have twice the budget of the phone to produce the USB camera.

But you produce in lower quantities so your development cost makes up a larger slice of the pie, as well as other fixed costs deeper into your supply chain.

Re: Why can’t you buy a good webcam?

#488

Post by justincormack » Tue, Dec 22, 2020, 4:51 PM UTC

dekhn wrote: post #389

ramraj07 wrote: post #368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can https://www.e-consystems.com/13mp-autofocus-usb-camera.asp I bought one of these for using with my lab microscope since the alternatives from thorlabs was 10x more expensive for no reason. It worked fine for a year then it stopped working. Maybe I spillled something on it? Who knows ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

thorlabs cameras, and scientific cameras in general, have very different response functions. useful if you want to make quantitative measurements, accurately represent a B&W scene, etc. I use a BlackFly (FLIR) camera on my scope, but have been looking to do something similar to you, since the camera API is not V4L2, but rather a custom framegrabber SDK.

Yeah I have one of these, the picture is nice with good lighting (I have a black and white one, with an antique 16mm film camera lens). Going to write a OBS plugin for it when I have time.

Re: Why can’t you buy a good webcam?

#489

Post by unixhero » Tue, Dec 22, 2020, 4:51 PM UTC

Which webcam can this crowd recommend?

bonus question: Why do you recommend that particular model?

Re: Why can’t you buy a good webcam?

#490

Post by the_pwner224 » Tue, Dec 22, 2020, 4:53 PM UTC

itsoktocry wrote: post #296

gaudat wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, so often I ask if the seller can provide a "perfect" display, that is, without any artifacts on the display. This adds 100-200 CNY to the price. There's a Chinese panel manufacturer called BOE that makes products competitive with some of the lower-end Samsung / LG panels. I got one 15.6" 2160p external display with a BOE panel that offers 100% sRGB coverage. I can see a huge difference compared to my Dell Latitu…

> I can see a huge difference compared to my Dell Latitude laptop display. And outside of a few occupations that might actually require pixel-perfect colour, what does this matter? Is this like the audiophile world, where people argue about seemingly subjective things that no else cares about? The customer interprets colours differently than you, the customer sees colours differently than you, and the customer is usi…

These differences are very clearly noticeable. I upgraded many years ago from a 72% sRGB to a 99% sRGB Dell IPS and everything looked much better. I just got the LG 27GN950 which is 95% DCI P3... I was mainly getting it for the 4k/144 with the P3 as a nice bonus (I already had 4k/60 on the Dell). Looking at the Dell, I was thinking that P3 might be nice to have but it wouldn't really matter much aside from photo editing - the colors on the Dell already looked great.

I just unboxed the new monitor 2 days ago. The richer color was immediately noticeable, and when I looked at some random photos I took with my phone recently I was blown away by just how red and green and yellow/blue things were. Like a completely new realm of color.

It's one of those things that you can't appreciate until you experience it (same going from the original 72% to 99% sRGB).

The Dell was $450 for 4k, 2.5 years ago. The new LG was $800, but you can find 60fps P3 4k monitors for around $500 these days iirc. If you're on Hacker News you probably use your computer a lot. Unless you're running low on cash, upgrading to a great monitor is worth it.