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

Why webcams aren’t good enough

reincubate.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 297 posts

Re: Why webcams aren’t good enough

#91

Post by JustSomeNobody »

josephg wrote: post #33
llampx wrote: post #23

I also noticed fairly early on, that phone cameras were improving by leaps and bounds, while laptop webcams and USB webcams seemed to be at a standstill, image-quality wise. I don't know why that is, but even Apple would seemingly rather shave 50 cents off the BOM by speccing a 720p Facetime camera in their $3000 Macbook Pros, and trying to make up the difference with software, like with the new M1 Macs that have bet…

> even Apple would seemingly rather shave 50 cents off the BOM by speccing a 720p Facetime camera in their $3000 Macbook Pros The reason I've heard is that the macbook display assembly simply doesn't have the depth to house a decent camera. The camera bump in phones exists for a reason - and phones are already way fatter than macbook displays. I have no idea if thats true though.

Apple: Thinnest laptop evar!

Also Apple: We can't give you a better camera because we gave you the thinnest laptop evar!

"We think you're gonna love it!"

Re: Why webcams aren’t good enough

#92

Post by booi »

clairity wrote: post #88

front-facing cameras (i.e., webcams) are unnecessary on a laptop, tablet, or phone. manufacturers should remove them in favor of better supporting dedicated equipment, since they'll never be 'good enough' when video quality actually matters. video calls have been part of the futurism canon for at least 100 years, but they still have little utility beyond a simple phone call (or even text messages in many cases). they…

this is a joke right?

Re: Why webcams aren’t good enough

#93

Post by krrrh »

I spend a lot of time on video calls every day, and wanted to take advantage of my iPhone camera. I had tried Epoccam and it was buggy, and broke between releases of Zoom or didn’t work in Slack calls. Screwing around with OBS was time consuming and pinned my fans.

Reincubate Camo has been a pleasure to use over the last 3 months, and has never let me down. Having good image quality on video calls is on par with wearing a clean shirt or showering before in person meetings. You can get by without it, but you make a much better impression if you step your game up a little bit.

One big plus of Camo is that it will also patch software like Slack so that it works with virtual cameras at all.

Re: Why webcams aren’t good enough

#94

Post by bluGill »

lhnz wrote: post #57
llampx wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It hasn't done so so far.

Yes, that's what's strange to me. Either laptop manufacturers are missing a trick that would help them compete, or people don't really care about picture quality in remote video calls.

Most people don't care about web cams at work. Most of my meetings I'm looking at a power point, or some other screen and so the person speaking isn't an issue.

A few people enable their camera all the time, but not everyone. In the few meetings I've been in where everyone is asked to turn on their camera so we can see each other (in some sort of team terms) at least one person says they are in a family situation where they cannot.

Cameras are a must when calling grandma. In an office situation they are at best a nice to have.

Re: Why webcams aren’t good enough

#95

Post by scotcha1 »

clairity wrote: post #88

front-facing cameras (i.e., webcams) are unnecessary on a laptop, tablet, or phone. manufacturers should remove them in favor of better supporting dedicated equipment, since they'll never be 'good enough' when video quality actually matters. video calls have been part of the futurism canon for at least 100 years, but they still have little utility beyond a simple phone call (or even text messages in many cases). they…

i personally use my front facing webcam on my computer 10-20x per day (for video calls, or short quick video walkthroughs). my kids also are using their cheap school laptops front facing webcams 3-4x per day with remote school, and my wife and i frequently use facetime on our iphones to chat throughout the day. i'm not interested in add'l dedicated equipment, i'm interested in the easiest solution to perform the job i need done

Re: Why webcams aren’t good enough

#96

Post by andredz »

krrrh wrote: post #93

I spend a lot of time on video calls every day, and wanted to take advantage of my iPhone camera. I had tried Epoccam and it was buggy, and broke between releases of Zoom or didn’t work in Slack calls. Screwing around with OBS was time consuming and pinned my fans. Reincubate Camo has been a pleasure to use over the last 3 months, and has never let me down. Having good image quality on video calls is on par with wear…

I can also recommend Camo; it has worked mostly all right.

Re: Why webcams aren’t good enough

#97

Post by bluGill »

michaelt wrote: post #70
kleiba wrote: post #17

Good enough for what ? Most of the sample pics look absolutely fine to me for every day use, i.e., online meetings.

Of course existing webcams meet expectations for online meetings - nobody expects meeting participants to use something that doesn't exist. But if you've avoided the $15 Amazon's Choice webcams and purchased the absolute peak of what the webcam industry can produce, wouldn't you expect something better than the mediocrity shown? What if you're someone who cares about their appearance, and the pallid, unhealthy look o…

Most of your what-ifs are happening on a phone with a better camera - at least for most people.

For the exceptions you are correct, but I believe they are overall exceptions.

Re: Why webcams aren’t good enough

#98

Post by jascii »

clairity wrote: post #88

front-facing cameras (i.e., webcams) are unnecessary on a laptop, tablet, or phone. manufacturers should remove them in favor of better supporting dedicated equipment, since they'll never be 'good enough' when video quality actually matters. video calls have been part of the futurism canon for at least 100 years, but they still have little utility beyond a simple phone call (or even text messages in many cases). they…

"video calls have been part of the futurism canon for at least 100 years, but they still have little utility beyond a simple phone call" While you could argue practical utility, the mere fact that millions are clinging to video conferencing for a sense of connectedness seems to suggest that it has at least an emotional utility. Not everybody is an introvert.

Re: Why webcams aren’t good enough

#99

Post by KineticLensman »

tda wrote: post #72
i_am_proteus wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A DSLR with a lens costs thousands of dollars. A cheap continuous light with a cheap softbox costs about $150, and gets the job done.

Of course, the point was more that regardless of price the following holds in poor light: webcam And also, not everyone wants to sit in front of a bright light

> Why doesn't Canon or Nikon have a go, or Sony?

Nikon offer a free webcam utility [0] that allows recent DSLRs (and mirrorless) to be used as a webcam when plugged into a PC. I tried it with my D850. The advantage is, predictably, awesome optics. The downsides were a) finding a place on my desk for the camera and some sort of mount b) the camera battery gets eaten really quickly.

Interestingly, the webcam utility isn't available for the smallest Nikon cameras - the Coolpix range - so I guess there won't be a dedicated Nikon webcam.

[0] https://downloadcenter.nikonimglib.com/en/products/548/Webca...

Re: Why webcams aren’t good enough

#100

Post by monadic3 »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #44
corysama wrote: post #15

Different article from a month ago “Why can’t you buy a good web cam?” https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25504771 Lots of points. Big one being that the market is bifurcated into: 1. People who just want the minimum as cheap as possible. 2. People willing to pay enough to buy a mirrorless photo camera and plug it in as a web cam when they need it.

I see this pattern everywhere - the market bifurcating into a) race-to-the-bottom garbage products that are barely crossing the legal threshold of fit for purpose, and are essentially a huge waste of natural resources, and b) quality goods sold to specialists or companies, usually severely overpriced (to cover low volume of sales, and/or just because the market will bear it). Does it have a name in economics? Are the…

Overproduction. Marxists write endlessly about the problem beginning with Marx himself.
Post reply on HN