picture quality

[ned1]

HI,
New to all this, but I must say this is a great bit of software, simple to use and seems to be running great
I am Running windows 7 64 bit with a single camera into my pc via a ezcap which is 25 fps max,
The problem I have (if it is a problem) is picture quality, it's ok but not great, I am running a outside camera with a "Sony Pro electronics pack" (that's what they say)
what I wold like to know is if I upgrade from "starter Edition" to "Basic Edition" will I be able get clearer live and stored clips.

thanks for your help
Ned

[ryan]

Hi Ned,

The starter edition of Vitamin D Video will only save video at QVGA (320x240) resolution. If your camera is streaming at a higher resolution than this you will be able to take advantage of that with the basic edition. Are the quality issues you are seeing related to resolution (small video being stretched bigger)?

- ryan

[ned1]

Hi Ryan.
All seems ok with the picture, it's looks good close up,
but a bit blurred at a distance like a low GB still camera if that makes sense !!

[Semper Vaporo]

I have to ask... you say that it looks good close up but blurry far away... do you mean when you are close to the screen the image is clear or is it that things that are close to the camera are in focus and things farther from it are out of focus? If the latter, then depending on the camera you may be able to adjust the focal setting.

Most "webcams" are designed to focus on a person's face, sitting in front of the camera for video chatting via the internet. For wide area viewing (as in surveillance situations) you want the focus set to far away (most often set to infinity). Most, but not all, of these cameras have one of two methods of adjusting the focus.

Some have a ring on the front of the camera that when turned will move the lens closer or farther away from the sensor and that will adjust the focal point. Turn it one way or the other until the image is in better focus.

The other method for setting the focus is electronically. Your camera may have come with a program for setting parameters on it and VDV will use whatever you set via that program. You have to set the camera's parameters via that program and then terminate that program and run VDV, which does not attempt to alter the parameters. There is also a program that used to be provided by Microsoft, and is still available at various places on the web, called "AMCAP" that will allow you to change the parameters of several different brands/models of webcams. There are dozens of different versions of this program on the web. It was provided as an example program for programmers and many different people have updated and enhanced it. I have found one version that allows you to make adjustments to the cameras settings while VDV is also showing the image (If VDV is using the camera then AMCAP won't show the image... apparently Windows has trouble sharing the image feed with two programs, but the setup commands can be changed while two programs are accessing the camera at once). There are many parameters that the cameras MAY expose to AMCAP for you to change (brightness, contrast, etc.) that you might find useful.

Unfortunately, there are some cameras that have no method for adjusting the focus. But I must point out that one of my various webcams that I have tried had a grease on the lens that once I cleaned it off the picture quality improved immensely!

If it is not the camera's focus that is the problem, then yes, you may need to go to a higher resolution image. 320x240 is a bare minimum. It is good enough for our brains to interpret the images as recognizable, but detail is lost. Like people's faces are probably not recognizeable unless they are VERY close to the camera (fill the image space). We might recognize people we know by the way they move or because of large features (hair style, general build) but it is probably not good enough to identify a person in a police lineup!

[ned1]

Quote
If it is not the camera's focus that is the problem, then yes, you may need to go to a higher resolution image. 320x240 is a bare minimum. It is good enough for our brains to interpret the images as recognizable, but detail is lost. Like people's faces are probably not recognizeable unless they are VERY close to the camera (fill the image space). We might recognize people we know by the way they move or because of large features (hair style, general build) but it is probably not good enough to identify a person in a police lineup.
=============================================================================================================================================================================
Spot on that Man,
The Camera is a CCTV (real one) with a "Sony Pro electronics pack" , 1/3 senor and not a web cam, see first post.
So if I run the basic edition will I see a better live and stored image, yes/no ?

Thanks
Ned

[Semper Vaporo]

Quote
If it is not the camera's focus that is the problem, then yes, you may need to go to a higher resolution image. 320x240 is a bare minimum. It is good enough for our brains to interpret the images as recognizable, but detail is lost. Like people's faces are probably not recognizeable unless they are VERY close to the camera (fill the image space). We might recognize people we know by the way they move or because of large features (hair style, general build) but it is probably not good enough to identify a person in a police lineup.
=============================================================================================================================================================================
Spot on that Man,
The Camera is a CCTV (real one) with a "Sony Pro electronics pack" , 1/3 senor and not a web cam, see first post.
So if I run the basic edition will I see a better live and stored image, yes/no ?

Thanks
Ned

I will venture a qualified, "yes, you should see a better image". I qualify that because the CCTV camera may still need focusing, and the converter that is changing it from the analog video signal out of the camera to the digital signal in the USB port (ezCap) and may be doing a poor job of it (I have no idea what it is capable of, as I don't have one to say one way or the other, but no system is any better than the worst link in the chain the signal passes through). You could even have a bad video cable causing the problem, but it is really hard to declare one part as being the "fix" without just trying each until you approve of the result. You have to select the most likely culprit that can be tested at the cheapest expense. Buying a new camera might be the most expensive and a new cable might be the cheapest, but the cable is probably the least likely problem.

Doubling the resolution will halve the size of the detail that can be seen.

AH! An idea... View the camera using Media Player or some other program (AMCAP) that will present it in higher resolutions. AMCAP is free to download from several places. Media Player should (I think) be capabile of accessing the camera. If you like the result, then the better resolution of the VDV Basic Edition will be the ticket! Did ezCap come with a program for viewing the video from it?

[ned1]

Hi,
Because this is a new installation and with what people have said I think there is a 95% Chance that by going to a higher resolution will improve the
live and saved image.
What I now have to think about is will you be able to recognize people's faces and at what cost to the pc as this is not a dedicated machine.
I can always give it a go and if it eats too much of my pc resources I can always put it to a lower resolution until I find a happy medium and hope it's
not back to the Starter Edition.

thanks for all your help
John

ps shame there's not a trial for the higher resolutions settings
pps Not sure why, but unable to get it to run on other software !!