Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Using a "proper" camera as a webcam

tratt.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 499 posts

Re: Using a "proper" camera as a webcam

#411

Post by _carbyau_ »

Hamcha wrote: post #75

Only tangentially related but if you already have a popular Logitech webcam (like the C920) chances are you can find a kit to mount C/CS/D-mount lenses on it, like with this one: https://www.kurokesu.com/shop/C920_REWORK_KIT2 C/CS/D mounts are for CCTV camera so you can find new and used lens for cheap. They will not fix a cheap/bad sensor, but they will definitely get you extra flexibility in what kind of framing/sh…

For those with a 3D printer they host their STEP files on github.

https://github.com/Kurokesu/3d_models

The github license field says: "GPL-3.0 license"

But they look great. I am tempted to buy a Brio and their kit.

Re: Using a "proper" camera as a webcam

#412

Post by Terretta »

coryfklein wrote: post #327
bradlys wrote: post #305

I hate to say this but it’s almost entirely not worth it. The image quality only shows up here because they’re uploading images that they took from the camera locally. Trying doing it with Zoom. The compression is absolutely terrible. You’re gonna find that you spent a lot of time and money only to see a decent quality image on your side . Everyone else is gonna see the same muddy mess that they always saw. The image…

Uhh Zoom is not going to erase the improved color balance and bokeh. Although I'll agree with you when it comes to the author's claim about fine-grained facial details being improved by the camera; those you'll almost certainly lose over Zoom compression.

Compression detail per bandwidth.

With blurred background due to bokeh, more bandwidth bits are available to the face detail. Nothing to tune, that’s just how constrained bitrate compression works.

Re: Using a "proper" camera as a webcam

#413

Post by wlonkly »

moduspol wrote: post #60
HidyBush wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Canon's EOS Webcam Utility supports cameras down to the EOS 1100D, which, depending on your level of luck, you can find used under $100. Then all you need is a kit lens which can be found for very very cheap nowadays. Or, if you really think you won't be moving much, just get a super cheap vintage one.

Eh, I've had mixed results with Canon's EOS Webcam Utility and my Rebel T7. I didn't see this documented anywhere, but apparently it's built only for Intel-based Macs. It'll still work on Apple Silicon, but only if the application using it is also built for Intel-based Macs. So you'd want to ensure you install the Intel-based version of Zoom, and then be careful to avoid it auto-updating to the version for Apple Sili…

Give Camera Live[1] a shot. Canon's own software doesn't support my ancient Rebel TSi so I have to use this one instead, but it's worked really well for me. It connects using Syphon so matching up architecture shouldn't matter (and it works under Rosetta).

I use Syphon Virtual Webcam[2] to feed to Zoom, but you can also use OBS.

[1] https://github.com/v002/v002-Camera-Live

[2] https://github.com/TroikaTronix/Syphon-Virtual-Webcam

Re: Using a "proper" camera as a webcam

#414

Post by lysp »

waddlesworth wrote: post #246

I have a pretty full on setup, with a condenser microphone on a boom, studio lights and softboxes pointed at me, with a full frame mirrorless camera and a high frame rate capture card. I tried doing meetings with it, but ended up getting a lot of inane comments about it, particularly as the microphone is in frame. Personally, I don't want to draw attention to myself in a meeting, so I've ended up going back to using…

You should try a shotgun microphone (ie. Rode NTG2)

It is directional, you can get a shock mount for it.

You can also get it quite close but slightly off camera pointing at you.

I'm not a fan of the microphone in frame, so this was my solution.

Re: Using a "proper" camera as a webcam

#415

Post by omegalulw »

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #137

If you go this route, please make sure your system is robust and ready to go before meetings. We had to ask one employee to go back to his reliable built-in webcam because every other meeting started with 2 minutes of him getting his camera turned on, messing with audio inputs, getting his microphone boom in place, and fighting other quirks. He also had a tendency to drop out of long meetings when his camera overheat…

I think it's also important to highlight commercial USB webcams, like the Logitech 922. They are kinda expensive but still cheaper than a DSLR and will get you all of the low hanging fruits over webcam quality. DSLR would get you benefit on top of that but arguably, given that 720p is the common webcam resolution, you wouldn't be missing out on much. Except maybe features like improved focus and depth of field effects.

Re: Using a "proper" camera as a webcam

#416

Post by felizuno »

sebular wrote: post #339
bradlys wrote: post #305

I hate to say this but it’s almost entirely not worth it. The image quality only shows up here because they’re uploading images that they took from the camera locally. Trying doing it with Zoom. The compression is absolutely terrible. You’re gonna find that you spent a lot of time and money only to see a decent quality image on your side . Everyone else is gonna see the same muddy mess that they always saw. The image…

This is absolutely not true. I worked with a guy who used a DSLR as a webcam and his picture was totally remarkable over Google Meet and Zoom. The very first thing I did was send a screenshot of the meeting's tile view to a friend, asking if he noticed anything funny about one of the videos, and he easily spotted the one I was talking about. Every time we had a new team member join the calls, they would immediately c…

^ this, I use a Sony RX100V with a first gen Blue Yeti and 1) They consistently connect and work better than what my Windows-using coworkers experience with hardware built into their monitors (and I regularly use Slack, Zoom, and Google Meets every day and it works seamlessly across them all) 2) As you mention every single person every single time comments when they initially see it. Like 100% of the time without fail.

IMO as an expensive consultant™ I think it improves perception and is courteous to my clients to give them a higher level of production value.

Re: Using a "proper" camera as a webcam

#417

Post by sumanthvepa »

I’ve been using a Sony ZV-1 as my webcam. With a low end laptop (Intel core i3 8th gen running Ubuntu) I had a lot of problems with using zoom. But I switched to a beefier machine with a Xeon processor and a Qadro 6000 graphics card which I use for simulation work and it all worked fine. The camera itself had no problems even with 4 hour sessions.

Re: Using a "proper" camera as a webcam

#418

Post by XorNot »

klodolph wrote: post #308
aphit wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would love to upgrade my audio game but don't know where to start. Any similar guides like the OP but for audio?

There are a ton of guides online, especially since the pandemic started. Getting a USB microphone is so easy and cheap that you probably don't need a guide for it. The guides that I've seen for USB mics are generally focused on the features that streamers need, which are somewhat unique (they want to capture desktop audio at the same time). If you are going for the prosumer option, I recommend Scarlett Solo + Shure S…

I will note I've had a bunch of issues with the Blue microphone USB output hanging when I reboot my PC with it plugged in: it still registers, but won't pickup audio - a quick replug fixes it, but it's incredibly annoying.

If I were modifying my setup today, I would've gone with an XLR mic out the gate: at the end of the day I ended up running analog audio to the Blue microphone anyway because the value of having monitor audio to your headphones is incredible (and you do not want any latency on that at all).

Re: Using a "proper" camera as a webcam

#419

Post by XorNot »

rane wrote: post #153
vlunkr wrote: post #143

I'd love to see stats on how many people actually still use webcams for online meetings. I rarely do, and I don't care if anyone else turns theirs on. Watching someone act like they aren't hyper-aware of what they look like on camera adds very little value to the conversation. Unless you're in sales, trying to make a good impression, or some kind of introductory meeting, who cares?

It's nice to see your colleagues and it adds an extra dimension to meetings.

With a 32" monitor it's actually really disconcerting to have a bunch of people feel way too close to me.

Re: Using a "proper" camera as a webcam

#420

Post by gandalfff »

I don't want a camera as a webcam. I don't want a device that only works sometimes and has to be setup before use. I don't want a camera that is so good all of my pores are in view. A small amount of blurriness is a feature, not a bug.
Post reply on HN