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

201–210 of 610 posts

Re: Webcams aren't good enough

#201

Post by MrLeap »

sfblah wrote: post #154

This makes me wonder whether there's some relatively simple configuration of cameras that can be used to give a basic 3-d type experience. Nothing crazy like the oculus, but maybe something where a computer can use head tracking so that as you move your head, you see a little bit around the other person's face so it feels a little more lifelike. I assume this would only be relevant for the primary speaker, of course.

A realsense camera, 2 hours worth of dev and OBS virtual cam and I could make a scattery POC of this :p

Re: Webcams aren't good enough

#202

Post by hgomersall »

savy91 wrote: post #183
hgomersall wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd love to compare lumina too, but you don't support Linux so I'll have to accept a crap webcam over a non functioning one.

You may want to try Obsbot meet, I recently switched to it and it's pretty decent on Linux

From the Obsbot site: "The OBSBOT Meet series hardware is able to work with both macOS and Linux, but we will not make the exclusive software for the Linux operating system."

Re: Webcams aren't good enough

#203

Post by chrisweekly »

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 don't understand the business model / viability of dedicated webcams. Software like Elgato Epoccam or OBS is free or cheap, and the % of people who would benefit from a decent webcam and who don't own a modern smartphone is literally 0.

Re: Webcams aren't good enough

#204

Post by SapporoChris »

logifail wrote: post #136
joe-collins wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My current apartment has no south windows. The previous unit had none east. Before that, no north. Before that, no south or north windows. "Just" fixing some problems can be a luxury.

> "Just" fixing some problems can be a luxury It really needn't be. (Proper) photographers have been dealing with these very same issues for longer than we've all been worrying about how we look on Zoom. Window Light: The Biggest, Bestest Softbox You Already Own : "Let’s say your windows are west-facing and you want to shoot in the afternoon. And you’re really terrified of hard light. Keep thinking of your window as…

I think I understand your point, under ideal or almost ideal conditions most webcams can work fine.

However, most people are not graced with the understanding of lighting and how cameras work. There's lots of opportunity to compensate or at least guide people with better hardware and software. The work done with smartphone cameras is clear evidence of this.

Re: Webcams aren't good enough

#205

Post by oliwarner »

xeromal wrote: post #188
hgomersall wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd love to compare lumina too, but you don't support Linux so I'll have to accept a crap webcam over a non functioning one.

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

Your 2004 opinion might mean more if we knew how many horses ran.

Re: Webcams aren't good enough

#206

Post by aquajet »

paulgerhardt wrote: post #78
krono wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 t…

I grew up just as landlines were giving way to cell phones. How did high fidelity let us pick up on emotional state?

Re: Webcams aren't good enough

#207

Post by sigstoat »

feet wrote: post #81
dewey wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Okay? So change it? Are the gods of thin devices stopping engineers from doing something different?

i’d be first in line for thicker everything, but there is a lot more value in thickening the body of a laptop than the screen.

Re: Webcams aren't good enough

#209

Post by kiwijamo »

IggleSniggle wrote: post #40
lucb1e wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You probably know of this already, but in some software you can have speech to text live subtitles. I hate to advertise for Google but their Meet thing is the only one where I know this exists. The quality is slightly worse than their YouTube auto-subtitles (and even those are worse than my own hearing as a non-native listener), though perhaps that's because the input is also worse and it needs to be realtime? Not su…

Microsoft Teams also does this.

Zoom has this also.

Re: Webcams aren't good enough

#210

Post by andrepew »

chrisweekly wrote: post #203
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 don't understand the business model / viability of dedicated webcams. Software like Elgato Epoccam or OBS is free or cheap, and the % of people who would benefit from a decent webcam and who don't own a modern smartphone is literally 0.

People who have video calls throughout the day constantly. I don't want to have to mess around setting up my phone on a stand and getting it connected every time I need to do a meeting.
Post reply on HN