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

Webcams aren't good enough

reincubate.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 610 posts

Re: Webcams aren't good enough

#71

Post by nojito »

feet wrote: post #19
navanchauhan wrote: post #12

You can use you phone's camera as a webcam with Reincubate's Camo App. This required a wired connection iirc. You can also use OBS Studio along with a virtual camera plugin to use any device which can output directly to your computer. But most of these solutions do not work on Safari or FaceTime unless you manually modify the app. Now, Apple is going to soon introduce their "It Just Works" solution with the next rele…

Great, because I never want to use my phone while in a meeting What the actual fuck are they thinking just use a decent cam in the laptop But yea, mic audio is always trash too

>What the actual fuck are they thinking just use a decent cam in the laptop

It will actually almost double the weight of the overall laptop if they added the same camera as they do on iPhone.

Re: Webcams aren't good enough

#72

Post by em3rgent0rdr »

kcb wrote: post #2

Webcams are good enough for their purpose which is video conferencing and calls. In the end your video is likely going to be encoded in like 360p low bitrate. I personally prefer not being in razor sharp detail on calls anyway. Anyway this is the one I've been using. https://www.amazon.com/Logitech-Webcam-Built-Stereo-Micropho... I like the integrated shutter better than the cover thing for the c920.

> "In the end your video is likely going to be encoded in like 360p low bitrate"

But a low-bitrate video that uses better-quality source pixels can still look much better than if used bad pixels as input.

Re: Webcams aren't good enough

#73

Post by dewey »

davidmurdoch wrote: post #63
ketzo wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> just use a decent cam in the laptop I mean, phone cameras will literally always be better than laptop cameras. They're just a lot bigger. Edit: I should clarify this a little. From my understanding, camera quality is pretty overwhelmingly limited by lens quality. Better lenses require a thicker / deeper camera housing, which is hard to stuff into the top lid of a laptop. Phones are "always" (although that might not…

What a curious take. They just need to put bigger cameras in the laptop. There is like 100x more space for such things.

Laptop "lids" are a lot thinner than your average phone, they might be able to use a plateau like at the back of the phones to house it but I'd guess if there would be a simple solution that they could "just" do it would've happened already.

Re: Webcams aren't good enough

#74

Post by [deleted] »

OJFord wrote: post #54
ketzo wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> just use a decent cam in the laptop I mean, phone cameras will literally always be better than laptop cameras. They're just a lot bigger. Edit: I should clarify this a little. From my understanding, camera quality is pretty overwhelmingly limited by lens quality. Better lenses require a thicker / deeper camera housing, which is hard to stuff into the top lid of a laptop. Phones are "always" (although that might not…

Why does that mean 'always'? i.e. rephrase GP you quoted: 'just use a lot bigger of a cam in the laptop'.

[deleted]

Re: Webcams aren't good enough

#75

Post by daveoc64 »

ramraj07 wrote: post #45
kcb wrote: post #2

Webcams are good enough for their purpose which is video conferencing and calls. In the end your video is likely going to be encoded in like 360p low bitrate. I personally prefer not being in razor sharp detail on calls anyway. Anyway this is the one I've been using. https://www.amazon.com/Logitech-Webcam-Built-Stereo-Micropho... I like the integrated shutter better than the cover thing for the c920.

I don’t know how much time you spend on zoom calls but if both sides have genuinely good connections and you have a good camera and lighting, you can get fairly high def video across. And it makes a big difference, especially if you’re 1-1 and want to make a proper connection and read their expression.

I don't know how up to date this is, but there are limitations in both Zoom and Microsoft Teams in regards to video quality:

https://support.zoom.us/hc/en-us/articles/207347086-Using-Gr...

You also need to have a higher plan to get 1080p video in some cases.

For the Zoom Pro account, you even have to contact Zoom Support to get them to enable 720p!

Re: Webcams aren't good enough

#76

Post by jacquesm »

davidmurdoch wrote: post #63
ketzo wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> just use a decent cam in the laptop I mean, phone cameras will literally always be better than laptop cameras. They're just a lot bigger. Edit: I should clarify this a little. From my understanding, camera quality is pretty overwhelmingly limited by lens quality. Better lenses require a thicker / deeper camera housing, which is hard to stuff into the top lid of a laptop. Phones are "always" (although that might not…

What a curious take. They just need to put bigger cameras in the laptop. There is like 100x more space for such things.

Laptop screens are much thinner than phones are thick so a phone actually has more space for the camera in the dimension that is most restricted.

Re: Webcams aren't good enough

#77

Post by jhgb »

nextos wrote: post #41
nicky0 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not in my experience. I'm curious why you would you expect it to overheat?

Some cameras are not designed to record HD video during long periods of time.

Does it need to be recording? Perhaps you could just capture live HDMI output.

Re: Webcams aren't good enough

#78

Post by paulgerhardt »

krono wrote: post #56
paulgerhardt wrote: post #49

Webcams feel like a deadend technology like self-rewinding cassettes on the eve of the release of the compact disc. The fidelity is garbage relative to something like a DSLR inside an Errol Box[1] and miles away from Starline style holography[2]. Eye contact is poor. Putting in a software filter to fix eye contact should be universal practice at this point. Hell even getting basic ring light next to your lens is univ…

Not entirely sure if this was meant as satire, but in case it wasn't: If I wanted to be judged on my physical looks or the quality in which those are presented to others over the wire, I would have been working in the film industry.

Genuinely believe a loss in fidelity moves us from acceptable telepresence to uncanny valley.

Landlines had exceptional fidelity and let one pick up the nuance of a person's emotional state. Today's cellular connections not so much. Thankfully things like Apple Facetime (audio only) recapture some of that.

Likewise with a high quality webcam I think it's important to treat your coworkers with respect by giving them the grace of seeing your body language in high resolution if you're going to opt out of physical meetings. Remote work is fine, just don't phone it in with the equivalent of 2000's era potato camera.

Re: Webcams aren't good enough

#79

Post by dangus »

feet wrote: post #19
navanchauhan wrote: post #12

You can use you phone's camera as a webcam with Reincubate's Camo App. This required a wired connection iirc. You can also use OBS Studio along with a virtual camera plugin to use any device which can output directly to your computer. But most of these solutions do not work on Safari or FaceTime unless you manually modify the app. Now, Apple is going to soon introduce their "It Just Works" solution with the next rele…

Great, because I never want to use my phone while in a meeting What the actual fuck are they thinking just use a decent cam in the laptop But yea, mic audio is always trash too

The 1080p laptop webcam that's in Apple's latest models is quite a decent camera that benefits from the ISP in Apple silicon. Even the ancient 720p camera hooked up to that ISP managed an incredible amount of improvement over the Intel models.

I'd also venture a guess that many other laptops' built-in webcams can outperform some of these dedicated units, not just the ones that are Apple's iPhone R&D beneficiaries.

"Mic audio is always trash" – again, try a newer Mac notebook model. Apple has been investing serious R&D into laptop microphones, and I think competitors are taking notice and making their own improvements.

It might sound crazy to buy a second phone for this kind of thing, but I do think there are people who will get a better value out of actually just buying a second iPhone as a webcam/streaming camera compared to buying a dedicated professional camera.

Unlike a mirrorless/DLSR camera, you can also acquire smartphones with deep carrier discounts and long, zero interest financing. So, presumably, you could buy yourself a new phone, and instead of trading in your old one you could use that as a streaming webcam.

Don't forget that iPhones aren't just $1000 luxury phones, Apple's cheapest new model is $429 and will stomp all over any dedicated webcam on this list. If you jump on the used market you can buy something like an iPhone 11 or XR for under $300 or $200 and still have a really solid webcam (as a bonus, you don't have to care about the condition of the battery).

Re: Webcams aren't good enough

#80

Post by probably_wrong »

_boffin_ wrote: post #46

Here's a question: why do people care so much about what they look like or how the camera displays them? Personally, I care more about the content being delivered than what someone (including the scene) looks like.

> I care more about the content being delivered than what someone (including the scene) looks like.

IMO, we all want to believe that but we really don't. All other things being equal, a professional-looking setup will trump someone streaming from their messy bedroom unless the content is really that good, which it typically isn't. Conscious or not, first impressions are a thing.

This is the type of opinion that used to infuriate me as a young programmer, as I used to think that good code presented badly would win over bad code presented nicely. I can now admit that I was wrong, and I therefore always invest some time in making everything look as nice as possible. Making my delivery more professional has not shown any downsides yet.

Post reply on HN