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

381–390 of 610 posts

Re: Webcams aren't good enough

#381

Post by bazzargh »

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.

It may be confusing because it's in reply to "Does Lumina work on Linux?" but doesn't answer that question. The tl;dr of the answer would be, "there's reasons it might not work, but I don't know"

Re: Webcams aren't good enough

#382

Post by grishka »

newsclues wrote: post #366
adrusi wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Smartphone cameras are small and far better sensors than what you get in webcams. They rely on software to produce images of the quality we're used to seeing, especially with less-than-ideal lighting, but the lenses and sensor are still far better than the Logitech C920. A webcam doesn't need the latest and greatest video hardware. Give it a camera module from a midrange 2017 smartphone and use the latest image proce…

The physics of optics are still a hard problem and laptop screens have less room which is why the suck.

There's no such limitation with a dedicated webcam, the kind you mount on top of your monitor. Yet these also are noticeably worse than what you'd find in a 5-year-old phone.

Re: Webcams aren't good enough

#383

Post by GekkePrutser »

SquareWheel wrote: post #313
xeromal wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can probably count the number of people on linux who will buy this webcam on my two hands.

I can understand the reason for believing there's no overlap, as Linux users tend to shy away from tracking-like features in general (which is the job of a camera!). But a few privacy features like a physical lens cap, and a hardware light that turns on if the camera is powered (not controlled by software) would really incentivize that market, I think. Linux users still like quality hardware, and are willing to pay f…

> I can understand the reason for believing there's no overlap, as Linux users tend to shy away from tracking-like features in general (which is the job of a camera!).

I don't agree. This is not the same 'tracking' as the one that Linux users generally abhor.

I'm a privacy nut and I track a whole ton of stuff around my house by the way and for my health etc. The difference is just that I track this stuff on my systems. Not on Samsung's or Xiaomi's or whatever. I use their brands actually but with privacy-conscious software. For example the amazing FOSS "GadgetBridge" app works great with Xiaomi's smartwatches and fitness band, giving them zero internet access and thus no way to track me. Yet it still collects the data for me. I know I should support a FOSS hardware product too but the only one around, the PineTime, is too premature to be useful IMO (I do own one). For my house stuff "Home Assistant" is amazing and it supports many health devices like scales also.

So, tracking is not bad. Companies tracking me is bad.

> But a few privacy features like a physical lens cap, and a hardware light that turns on if the camera is powered (not controlled by software) would really incentivize that market, I think.

Yes a lens cap is a must. I bought an aftermarket one for my Logitech C920. It seems to be something that's more on the radar now as many laptops have them again (like Lenovo).

> Linux users still like quality hardware, and are willing to pay for it.

Absolutely!

Re: Webcams aren't good enough

#384

Post by 2gremlin181 »

LAC-Tech wrote: post #349
vhanda wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think they meant to buy an extra android phone and use that as a webcam.

I guess I don't understand the mechanism where by you use an android phone as an external webcam. Guess I never tried just plugging it in via usb and seeing if my OS picked it up...

There are quite a few apps that let you easily do that. I use DroidCam which let's you do it over your local network as well, reducing the cables running to your PC.

Re: Webcams aren't good enough

#385

Post by vxNsr »

derelicto wrote: post #327
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…

Thank you for focusing into this space. Is there a reason why the lumina webcams only focus on going up to 30/40 fps and not 4k/60fps? Are there plans to improve that aspect?

Possibly because many internet connections are gonna struggle to support that streaming out and most video conferencing apps compress anyways.

Re: Webcams aren't good enough

#386

Post by GekkePrutser »

ncmncm wrote: post #186
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…

What sucks most is that Logitech, which used to be a proud name (back when "Feels good / Feels better") has gone totally to shit. Even their mice are designed to fail in a year. (Spill on the desk, the mouse that only got damp on the bottom is dead, dead, dead. That can't be accidental.) A full article on what went wrong at Logitech corporate could be enlightening, if not helpful.

True, it was a great brand when they were growing. Then they got big and the bean counters started shaving away at quality. See all the problems with the G815/915 keycaps (I looked into it because I was thinking of getting one)

I use Microsofts $5 "Basic Optical Mouse" mice now, which generally me for years and is surprisingly comfy (though typical $5 creaky plastic). I have RSI so I'm fussy with mice but this one is pretty good for me. So even with beancounting it's possible to make a quality and lastign product. I've only had to replace two of them in the last 10 years or so (and I have 6 of them in use). Both were still working even but the plastic was just getting too creaky and glossy from all the use.

Re: Webcams aren't good enough

#387

Post by _def »

logifail wrote: post #48

There is a reason that for hundreds of years painters and (later) photographers have preferred working in spaces with North-facing windows[0], and that is because it's a simple way of ensuring neutral, even light. My home office is (by design) in a room with one North-facing window. I use a Logitech C920. Many people have told me how good my webcam feed is. I don't think it's that the C920 is particularly brilliant,…

With a North facing window, where does the camera sit to get the desired result? Asking because I have north facing windows only and I'm wondering if I could facilitate them better

Re: Webcams aren't good enough

#388

Post by vjerancrnjak »

kylecordes wrote: post #351
adrusi wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Smartphone cameras are small and far better sensors than what you get in webcams. They rely on software to produce images of the quality we're used to seeing, especially with less-than-ideal lighting, but the lenses and sensor are still far better than the Logitech C920. A webcam doesn't need the latest and greatest video hardware. Give it a camera module from a midrange 2017 smartphone and use the latest image proce…

This is the answer. Camera and processor from a several-year-old smart phone, which is now quite cheap. Sell it for $500. So far no one has, there must be a reason no one can.

I always wondered how IMX377EQH5 sucked in some devices and was incredible in others (Nexus 5X has really good video/picture quality).

Some devices use it for 4K video and it looks like upscaled 480p. Yet 1080p on Nexus 5X looks very sharp.

Re: Webcams aren't good enough

#389

Post by harry8 »

>The Razer and Adwaita webcams offer no settings

*On mac. Kiyo has settings on windows. I had a lot more luck setting up on a windows laptop then using on Mac & separately on linux. The ring light is dimmable and i won't post them, but i think my selfies look better than his.

Zero affiliation with any vendor and it shits me to tears razer do windows only settings and razor's whole software experience it's something I dislike intensely. It's a reasonable option for your consideration along with a blue yeti mic for a Linux based home Office setup where you look ok, your voice sounds sound clear and the money isn't as bad as it could be.

Re: Webcams aren't good enough

#390

Post by p1esk »

adrusi wrote: post #345
dharma1 wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I expect mobile phone cameras to kill webcams. All the innovation happens there and when people already have something getting closer to dSLR quality each year, why invest in a specialised webcam? Apple just needs to bake webcam sharing/remote camera control into iOS and come up with a nice attachment for the phone that works with MacBooks and displays so you don’t have to look at the camera at a weird angle. Maybe s…

They announced just this at WWDC a couple weeks ago.

Link?
Post reply on HN