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

261–270 of 610 posts

Re: Webcams aren't good enough

#261

Post by alexb_ »

masklinn wrote: post #175
davidmurdoch wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The bump would go towards the keyboard, I'd think.

There's very little clearance in that direction, and the clearance which there is is necessary for the screen / lens not to touch the keyboard / case and get scratched. So if you have a bump on the inner side, you also need to have a notch in the topcase. And unless you move the webcam something weird (an edge or below the screen), you need to have that notch through or below right below trackpad, which is less than…

If Apple released a notch in the bottom side of their macbooks for a camera bump to fit in, everyone would be calling them visionary geniuses and they would use it to jack up the price 200 dollars more.

Re: Webcams aren't good enough

#262

Post by derekdahmer »

wyager wrote: post #150
xyzzy_plugh wrote: post #29

This made me laugh. > Using an iPhone as a webcam is easily the best option without dropping an excess of $1,000 for professional camera gear. Using the iPhone you already own, or a recent hand-me-down, a moderate investment in lighting, and Reincubate Camo, you can get excellent results and none of the frustration and hassle that accompanies standalone webcams. I don't have an iPhone. So if I want to buy one that is…

Don't use a sony A6**; they overheat. Use a fujifilm or an A7 series.

A7 is definitely a better pick but I use a A6000 as my webcam and haven’t had any issues with overheating.

My main annoyance with the A6000 is can’t charge and film at the same time so I had to buy a dummy battery pack power adapter which works but looks janky.

Re: Webcams aren't good enough

#263

Post by jacquesm »

masklinn wrote: post #254
jacquesm wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hm. Interesting: you could put the battery in the screen making it quite a bit thicker, and then have the base thinner, that would change the balance though and it might not be as stable when sitting open on a desk. It'd be great to have a 20 hour life laptop though.

> that would change the balance though and it might not be as stable when sitting open on a desk Iirc that was one of the SB’s issues which the hinge had to manage. And things would probably be worse for a lid filled with battery.

Yes, they would be. Still, interesting and I'm wondering if there is a way to use this.

Re: Webcams aren't good enough

#264

Post by nmstoker »

firebaze wrote: post #240
adhesive_wombat wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If your software works only on Windows, you've written non-portable software. Likely, you have all your core logic mixed up with Windowsy UI and now you're stuck there. If it works on Windows and Mac, you've written portable software but just can't be bothered to support Linux. At a guess the problem is that you want to ship binaries only and don't want to deal with doing all the packaging and testing for Linux. For…

Could you tl'dr? My naive reading of your comment doesn't help.

How heavily simplified do you need it?

Doesn't seem that hard to follow (nor an especially long read worthy of shortening) but everyone's different.

Re: Webcams aren't good enough

#265

Post by EwanToo »

rlei wrote: post #171

I'm the cofounder at Lumina - we're building a modern webcam designed to solve some of these problems. There's really been a lack of innovation in the entire home office space, with the webcam being particularly bad. It sucks that a decade-old product (Logitech C920) is still the bestselling product today -- that would be like if Apple stopped releasing new phones after the iPhone 4S (launched 2012), and it remained…

I'd love to try a Lumina webcam but at the moment it'd cost me $200 shipping and import tax to the UK.

It's a pretty big punt compared to buying something off Amazon that I know I can send back without a quibble if it's no better than my Logitech Streamcam.

Re: Webcams aren't good enough

#266

Post by brandoncarl »

I use Camo (lifetime $79 license) and an iPhone SE I picked up on eBay for $200.

I've had dozens of people comment how clear my camera is. Many now purchased a similar setup. I used OBS for a long time since it was free, but the quality wasn't close.

If you're in a line of work that requires you to stream it's a worthwhile investment by a great company that just keeps getting better.

Re: Webcams aren't good enough

#267

Post by viraptor »

adhesive_wombat wrote: post #234
Beltalowda wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does Lumina work on Linux? I can't really find anything about it (there is also a Lumina Desktop Environment for Linux it seems), and while it says "Lumina is compatible with Windows and Macintosh machine" this can mean "we don't directly support Linux, but it should work" (like Logitech), or it can mean "we have specialized drivers/software that only work on Windows and macOS".

If your software works only on Windows, you've written non-portable software. Likely, you have all your core logic mixed up with Windowsy UI and now you're stuck there. If it works on Windows and Mac, you've written portable software but just can't be bothered to support Linux. At a guess the problem is that you want to ship binaries only and don't want to deal with doing all the packaging and testing for Linux. For…

When you write drivers there's no such thing as portable code. You need to target different APIs, different environment assumptions, etc. Sure, there's some common core most likely, but I think this rant is misplaced when talking about a hardware company.

The software postprocessing is a different question and could be more common... But you're still specialising it for DX / v4l2+gui / whatever macos uses. That said... I'd kill for an independent library for video processing that specialises in camera outputs - beyond different profiles, there's no technical reason that couldn't be used independently of hardware.

Re: Webcams aren't good enough

#268

Post by smoldesu »

adhesive_wombat wrote: post #234
Beltalowda wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does Lumina work on Linux? I can't really find anything about it (there is also a Lumina Desktop Environment for Linux it seems), and while it says "Lumina is compatible with Windows and Macintosh machine" this can mean "we don't directly support Linux, but it should work" (like Logitech), or it can mean "we have specialized drivers/software that only work on Windows and macOS".

If your software works only on Windows, you've written non-portable software. Likely, you have all your core logic mixed up with Windowsy UI and now you're stuck there. If it works on Windows and Mac, you've written portable software but just can't be bothered to support Linux. At a guess the problem is that you want to ship binaries only and don't want to deal with doing all the packaging and testing for Linux. For…

I don't really get this. Linux has had the same problem with audio interfaces, and you know what the solution was? Class-compliant USB peripherals. That's probably what people are asking for here: nobody wants to install additional software to make their webcam work, so why can't the processing be done on-device (especially if they're charging $200!).

Re: Webcams aren't good enough

#269

Post by modeless »

rlei wrote: post #171

I'm the cofounder at Lumina - we're building a modern webcam designed to solve some of these problems. There's really been a lack of innovation in the entire home office space, with the webcam being particularly bad. It sucks that a decade-old product (Logitech C920) is still the bestselling product today -- that would be like if Apple stopped releasing new phones after the iPhone 4S (launched 2012), and it remained…

> Size isn't everything. As the iPhone shows, you can get very good image quality from a tiny sensor and lens if you have the right tech supporting it. (At Lumina, most of our eng effort is on the software layer)

This is my problem with all the webcam startups. So what if you can mask some of the problems of small sensors and lenses using machine learning that adds a whole new set of problems? You could have done that without even making hardware at all. We have plenty of crappy hardware out there already, and if yours is only a minor improvement with the "magic" in software then it mostly amounts to a hardware dongle to enforce your software license. No thanks!

If you're going to bother making hardware, you should make good hardware. That means a big sensor and a big lens. Start there, and sure go crazy with the machine learning afterward, you'll get much better results with less effort when you start with better input! And you'll have no competition because there's literally nobody else out there putting decent lenses on webcams.

Re: Webcams aren't good enough

#270

Post by moralestapia »

Forgeties79 wrote: post #110
moralestapia wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Care to share some quick tips?

Sure! 1) Avoid fluorescent lighting like the plague. You’ll look sickly. 2) Find a nice warm (tungsten/more orange) lamp if your lighting is inadequate. It can be small it doesn’t matter. Place it diagonally from you at eye level. 3) Camera at eye level. 4) If you want to get fancy, get another lamp higher above you (several feet) and place it opposite your main lamp for a backlight. So if your main light is front ri…

Thanks!
Post reply on HN