Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital Cameras (Point and Shoot) > Hybrid Still/Movie/MP3 Digicams

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Aug 19, 2008, 2:34 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 13
Default

Well the Aiptek 1080p does indeed have the problem described before with the AV-in- it drops the lower field off the frame, so it's only capturing action at 30/sec AND (or) this is basically half resolution, depending on how you look at it. This is definitely affecting the value of the video.

I do like the H.264 compression. It makes a memory card last a long time and I'm not eating up all my hard drive space with clips. I like that it can take SDHC cards.

What hybrids WOULD record AV-in with the full resolution and carry the info from both fields, 60 fields/sec? I don't really care that much if the format stores as Interlaced or Progressive Scan. Well, I guess Interlace would be best since we can try out different software solutions to de-interlace but if it deinterlaced into Progressive Scan in the recorder hardware you're pretty much stuck.

H.264 would be nice to have too. Actually it doesn't HAVE to be a camcorder either, a stand-alone DVR would be fine if small and battery-powered too.

Oznog99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Aug 19, 2008, 4:55 PM   #2
Moderator
 
fishycomics's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: NYC NY
Posts: 9,621
Default

No hybrid economy models will do Hid def av input not one sorry. wish I do wish they do and hope that that is the next model coming out:G

[email protected] up to 30 FPs 29.97 av input only. otherswere less theres befor a 720P and 640x480 Sd one

at one time I thought it was 740x480. av input I makemy mistakes but I make up for my mistakez
fishycomics is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 19, 2008, 5:08 PM   #3
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 13
Default

fishycomics wrote:
Quote:
No hybrid economy models will do Hid def av input not one sorry. wish I do wish they do and hope that that is the next model coming out:G

[email protected] up to 30 FPs 29.97 av input only. otherswere less theres befor a 720P and 640x480 Sd one

at one time I thought it was 740x480. av input I makemy mistakes but I make up for my mistakez
No I didn't say I wanted HD input, sorry I wasn't clear there. Just plain old NTSC. External bullet camera actually.
A-HD, like the other Aipteks, claims it records 740x480 @30frames/sec or [email protected]/sec depending on where you look, but it's actually dropping the second interlaced frame so instead of 60 fields/sec it's only 30 and the vertical resolution's only 240 not 480 too. I see artifacts from that. (oh wait, this is fishycomics so you know the score... well, that's for anybody else trying to understand the question).

Now the A-HD+, I saw where it shoots in interlaced as well as progressive scan mode... but that's not something that applies to the AV-in, is it? It's not capable of doing an interlaced 640x480 30frames/sec 60fields/sec recording of the AV-in?
Oznog99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 19, 2008, 9:23 PM   #4
Moderator
 
fishycomics's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: NYC NY
Posts: 9,621
Default

As one said at oe time the 720x480 or 640x480 av in was actually 320x240.


fishycomics is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 21, 2008, 1:59 PM   #5
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 13
Default

Any idea what these people:
https://www.actionvideocams.com/Helmet_Cam_DVR.html
are selling as their "Micro DVR"? Surely it has a real brand name, these guys are just obscuring it to make it look like "their" product. IIRC this is the same website that previously sold a "Micro Action DVR" that was actually an Aiptek MPVR they just photoshopped over the Aiptek label and never mentioned what it was. Well, we all gotta make money...




Or what that "Elmo SUV-Cam II" system is like?
http://www.elmo.co.jp/suv-cam/en/product/spec.html

Spec sheet says "[704x480] [640x480]..." resolution MPEG4 and 25 fps... which would not translate extremely well to NTSC framerates if you put it on a DVD for example. So apparently this is a PAL version, I wonder if they offer an NTSC? If so I can't find it.

The camera might be higher quality than normal bullets... or might just be an overpriced repackaging of the same tech.

Well, at that price I'm not going to be able to try this stuff anytime soon anyways.
Oznog99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 22, 2008, 1:41 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
adric22's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 359
Default

Yeah.. I'm the one that originally pointed out the poor input quality. To my knowledge, none of the low-end cameras are supporting this. They just lie in their marketing material and say that they record at 640x480 but they are just scaling a single field up to that resolution. So even though you are getting 640x480, there is no more picture detail than one would get with 320x240.

The sheer fact that they bother to up-scale the video tells you that they are intentionally lying about the resolution, otherwise they'd just leave it at 320x240. But they know that only 10% of the users of the cameras will try the video input, and 99.9% of those people will never notice the difference, and the 0.01% that do notice the difference aren't going to take the time do complain about it.
adric22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 23, 2008, 5:55 PM   #7
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 13
Default

Could you post a link to where you analyzed that resolution?

Just how did you test it?
Oznog99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 25, 2008, 3:02 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
adric22's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 359
Default

Oznog99 wrote:
Quote:
Could you post a link to where you analyzed that resolution?

Just how did you test it?
I don't know how to explain this.. I deal with video production regularly, and it is just one of those things that I could immediately see. No test was required, just a trained eye.

The obvious thing to do is look for interlace lines. Anytime you are dealing with NTSC or PAL video, it is going to be interlaced. Whenever looking at a still frame from an interlaced video source, you will see jagged edges, or an effect that looks like a comb. (if you are unfamiliar, go google interlacing)

The very first thing I noticed when I recorded some video with my MPVR+ is that I didn't see any interlacing. The video format was 720x480 at 30 frames per second, so there should have been interlacing since it was interlaced video I recorded.

In the absence of any interlace lines there are only two possibilities. One is that they are using a de-interlacing scheme with some form of interpolation. However, this is usually obvious because fast motion scenes will have a ghost image or double-image. I didn't see any of that. The other possibility is they are just dropping one of the fields and scaling the image up to 720x480.. This is what they are doing.


adric22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 1, 2008, 12:38 AM   #9
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 13
Default

Well yeah I can see the jagged lines on diagonal things too. And I've picked up some action shots that I'm familiar with having filmed in miniDV and it's clear they're dropping fields on the Aiptek.

Actually, with a Video-In, the simple thing to do would be to generate a test pattern of bars on a PC with video-out.
Oznog99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 1, 2008, 8:42 PM   #10
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 13
Default

Ah I found footage taken with that "Action Video Cams Micro DVR":
http://community.grand-am.com/granda...9-c32ed0beca0a

Not exactly 640x480 as claimed, is it?
Oznog99 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 9:10 PM.