f



Has anyone used a webcam under linux SUCCESSFULLY

Please report which one worked most easily. I would like high
resolution. I will be using one for mostly taking a lot of single
shot pictures with command line. 

thanks!

i

0
Ignoramus24818
9/3/2006 3:37:11 AM
comp.os.linux.misc 33599 articles. 1 followers. amosa69 (78) is leader. Post Follow

19 Replies
576 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 8

On Sun, 03 Sep 2006 03:37:11 +0000, Ignoramus24818 wrote:

> Please report which one worked most easily. I would like high
> resolution. I will be using one for mostly taking a lot of single
> shot pictures with command line. 
> 
> thanks!
> 
> i

Try here

http://www.qbik.ch/usb/devices/

Lots info

Dave

0
me4 (19624)
9/3/2006 6:28:29 AM
Ignoramus24818 <ignoramus24818@NOSPAM.24818.invalid> wrote:
> Please report which one worked most easily. I would like high
> resolution. I will be using one for mostly taking a lot of single
> shot pictures with command line. 

www.elphel.com has cameras connected directly to the net with resolutions
above 3 megapixels. On sourceforge they also have a live-CD based on
knoppix linux which can be used to control their cameras.

regards Henrik
-- 
The address in the header is only to prevent spam. My real address is:
hc8(at)uthyres.com Examples of addresses which go to spammers:
root@variousus.net root@localhost

0
9/3/2006 10:50:36 AM
On or about 2006-09-03 Sunday 04:37, I did witness the following events
concerning Ignoramus24818:

> Please report which one worked most easily. I would like high
> resolution. I will be using one for mostly taking a lot of single
> shot pictures with command line.
> 
> thanks!
> 
> i

Webcam and high-resolution are mutually exclusive terms. With software
enhancement, a webcam can be pushed to 640x480 still capture, they're
invariably 320x240 or lower video resolution since a: they use CMOS sensors
b: it reduces the bandwidth overhead and c: it reduces the price of the
hardware. If you want high-resolution, use a DV camera and feed video to
your app.
-- 
I hereby testify that the above statement is an accurate recollection of the
events mentioned therein.
http://www.dotware.co.uk
Registered Linux user #426308 -*- http://counter.li.org
0
james199 (2531)
9/3/2006 11:09:41 AM
On Sun, 03 Sep 2006 03:37:11 +0000, Ignoramus24818 wrote:

> Please report which one worked most easily. I would like high
> resolution. I will be using one for mostly taking a lot of single
> shot pictures with command line. 
> 
> thanks!
> 
> i

I have used a logitech quickcam in the past with Linux.

0
ray65 (5421)
9/3/2006 2:56:37 PM
Ignoramus24818 (ignoramus24818@NOSPAM.24818.invalid) writes:
> Please report which one worked most easily. I would like high
> resolution. I will be using one for mostly taking a lot of single
> shot pictures with command line. 
> 
> thanks!
> 
> i
> 

Of course they work, but as someone rightfully pointed out, they
aren't intended for high resolution, because they aren't intended
for those applications.

The $10 garage sale webcam (complete in box) didn't work, and
just as I was about to install the needed drivers, I scored two
webcams at another garage sale, for a dollar each.  Plugged on in,
didn't work, plugged the other one in, it did work.

That means that the last camera was the one of the three that worked
with whatever my distributiion could handle.  At least the first
one could have, and I just never bothered doing anything with the third.

Pick a webcam that seems to fit your purposes and price range, do a
websearch to find out about it and whether people are using it with Linux,
and if it works buy it, if you can't find details then pick another camera.

You may need to figure out what's inside, because I gather a lot of
cameras are branding of the same basic webcam (and the brand is less
important than compatibility at the IC level).

   Michael

0
et4722 (580)
9/3/2006 4:03:02 PM
Michael Black wrote:

> The $10 garage sale webcam (complete in box) didn't work, and
> just as I was about to install the needed drivers, I scored two
> webcams at another garage sale, for a dollar each.  Plugged on in,
> didn't work, plugged the other one in, it did work.

OK, so what sort was it?

- Richard

0
rkimber (114)
9/3/2006 6:36:50 PM
On Sun, 03 Sep 2006 07:28:29 +0100, gort <me@privacy.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 03 Sep 2006 03:37:11 +0000, Ignoramus24818 wrote:
>
>> Please report which one worked most easily. I would like high
>> resolution. I will be using one for mostly taking a lot of single
>> shot pictures with command line. 
>> 
>> thanks!
>> 
>> i
>
> Try here
>
> http://www.qbik.ch/usb/devices/

Dave, thanks for the link. I used google myself and found various
pages etc. But I was not asking to point me to webpages. I can use
(and did use) google myself.

I want to know if anyone here got a webcam to work personally. I have
a logitech 4000 webcam and it does not actually work (many things are
not right with it). That's despite what "webpages" say. 

When I try to run mplayer, it shows a blank screen, though the light
on the webcam comes up. If I unplug it from USB and then plug it back
in, it becomes 100% unresponsive. Etc. It is just not working right.

So. I can dig up all kinds of webpages myself, I want to know if
anyone got anything in particular to actually work well. 

i

0
Ignoramus17274
9/3/2006 9:19:14 PM
On Sun, 03 Sep 2006 11:09:41 GMT, Jim <james@the-computer-shop.co.uk> wrote:
> On or about 2006-09-03 Sunday 04:37, I did witness the following events
> concerning Ignoramus24818:
>
>> Please report which one worked most easily. I would like high
>> resolution. I will be using one for mostly taking a lot of single
>> shot pictures with command line.
>> 
>> thanks!
>> 
>> i
>
> Webcam and high-resolution are mutually exclusive terms. With software
> enhancement, a webcam can be pushed to 640x480 still capture, they're
> invariably 320x240 or lower video resolution since a: they use CMOS sensors
> b: it reduces the bandwidth overhead and c: it reduces the price of the
> hardware. If you want high-resolution, use a DV camera and feed video to
> your app.

OK, good point. 640x480 would be fine with me, I think. (if it is
honest 640x480 and not "software enhanced"). So, I am looking for real
people who actually used a real webcam and it worked. 

i

0
Ignoramus17274
9/3/2006 9:20:48 PM
On Sun, 03 Sep 2006 08:56:37 -0600, ray <ray@zianet.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 03 Sep 2006 03:37:11 +0000, Ignoramus24818 wrote:
>
>> Please report which one worked most easily. I would like high
>> resolution. I will be using one for mostly taking a lot of single
>> shot pictures with command line. 
>> 
>> thanks!
>> 
>> i
>
> I have used a logitech quickcam in the past with Linux.
>

That's great. Which webcam it was and what linux. Thank you!!!

i

0
Ignoramus17274
9/3/2006 9:21:06 PM
On 3 Sep 2006 16:03:02 GMT, Michael Black <et472@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote:
> Ignoramus24818 (ignoramus24818@NOSPAM.24818.invalid) writes:
>> Please report which one worked most easily. I would like high
>> resolution. I will be using one for mostly taking a lot of single
>> shot pictures with command line. 
>> 
>> thanks!
>> 
>> i
>> 
>
> Of course they work, but as someone rightfully pointed out, they
> aren't intended for high resolution, because they aren't intended
> for those applications.
>
> The $10 garage sale webcam (complete in box) didn't work, and
> just as I was about to install the needed drivers, I scored two
> webcams at another garage sale, for a dollar each.  Plugged on in,
> didn't work, plugged the other one in, it did work.
>
> That means that the last camera was the one of the three that worked
> with whatever my distributiion could handle.  At least the first
> one could have, and I just never bothered doing anything with the third.
>
> Pick a webcam that seems to fit your purposes and price range, do a
> websearch to find out about it and whether people are using it with Linux,
> and if it works buy it, if you can't find details then pick another camera.
>
> You may need to figure out what's inside, because I gather a lot of
> cameras are branding of the same basic webcam (and the brand is less
> important than compatibility at the IC level).

Makes sense. I have a logitech 400 webcam and, unfortunately, it does
not work, as I mentioned in my pervious post. 

i

0
Ignoramus17274
9/3/2006 9:22:00 PM
Ignoramus24818 wrote:

> Please report which one worked most easily. I would like high
> resolution. I will be using one for mostly taking a lot of single
> shot pictures with command line.
> 
> thanks!
> 
> i

Lots of them work, but they don't do high resolution :)

have you tryed this driver?
http://mxhaard.free.fr/download.html

it puts a lot of logitech cams working and other brands too.

regards
ArameFarpado
0
9/3/2006 10:02:17 PM
On Sun, 03 Sep 2006, Ignoramus24818 wrote:

> Please report which one worked most easily. I would like high
> resolution. I will be using one for mostly taking a lot of single
> shot pictures with command line. 

If you're looking for a specific suggestion for a webcam to buy, tell us
where you're located. I can tell you of a specific model that you can
easily buy in Ottawa, Canada, and that works for me with Fedora 4, but I
have no idea if it's available in Tucson or in Germany.

-- 
Yves Bellefeuille <yan@storm.ca>
Google users: To reply to posts, click "show options" next to the
poster's name, and then click "Reply" in the line that says:
"Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message"
0
yan6406 (130)
9/4/2006 6:49:51 PM
On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 14:49:51 -0400, Yves Bellefeuille <yan@storm.ca> wrote:
> On Sun, 03 Sep 2006, Ignoramus24818 wrote:
>
>> Please report which one worked most easily. I would like high
>> resolution. I will be using one for mostly taking a lot of single
>> shot pictures with command line. 
>
> If you're looking for a specific suggestion for a webcam to buy, tell us
> where you're located. I can tell you of a specific model that you can
> easily buy in Ottawa, Canada, and that works for me with Fedora 4, but I
> have no idea if it's available in Tucson or in Germany.
>

I am in Illinois, USA. If there is something that worked for you in
Ottawa, I would be interested.

i

0
Ignoramus25819
9/5/2006 2:47:33 AM
Ignoramus24818 wrote:
> Please report which one worked most easily. I would like high
> resolution. I will be using one for mostly taking a lot of single
> shot pictures with command line. 

I actually spent a couple days trying to get some webcams working in our 
office (for the fun of it).

We have a Creative Webcam Live which works okay with Linux, if you 
compile the spca5xx driver yourself.  However, it can only use up to 
640x480 resolution, and it doesn't auto-adjust to outdoor lighting. 
Under Windows, it can take stills at 1024x768.  There is a "Live Pro" 
model that can do higher res stills, but that has zero driver support in 
Linux.

We also have an old Intel Easy PC Camera that works with the same 
driver, if you uncomment the "RH9_REMAP" define, and modprobe it with 
"force_rgb=1".  This cam only handles up to 320x240 resolution.

For the Creative cam, I ended up using Windows under VMWare because I 
wanted to point it outside.  Unfortunately, it requires some babying to 
get started after a reboot, but at least it can see out the window. 
Also, be aware that if you go this route, VMWare doesn't support USB 
2.0, so you have to disable all USB 2 drivers in your Linux host or use 
a USB 1.1 hub between the host and the webcam to force it to slow down.

Nathan
0
no391 (16)
9/5/2006 2:59:18 AM
On Tue, 05 Sep 2006, Ignoramus25819 wrote:

> I am in Illinois, USA. If there is something that worked for you in
> Ottawa, I would be interested.

A Labtec Webcam Plus USB (about $ 30 Canadian) works for me with Fedora 4.
I use the driver at http://mxhaard.free.fr/download.html .

-- 
Yves Bellefeuille <yan@storm.ca>
Google users: To reply to posts, click "show options" next to the
poster's name, and then click "Reply" in the line that says:
"Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message"
0
yan6406 (130)
9/5/2006 4:41:54 AM
Yves Bellefeuille wrote:

> On Sun, 03 Sep 2006, Ignoramus24818 wrote:
> 
>> Please report which one worked most easily. I would like high
>> resolution. I will be using one for mostly taking a lot of single
>> shot pictures with command line.
> 
> If you're looking for a specific suggestion for a webcam to buy, tell us
> where you're located. I can tell you of a specific model that you can
> easily buy in Ottawa, Canada, and that works for me with Fedora 4, but I
> have no idea if it's available in Tucson or in Germany.

I don't understand the geographical point. Are there not generally available
models that work anywhere, as with most other peripherals? I thought that
the OP was just asking for a selection of models that were known to work,
from which he would then make his choice.

- Richard.

0
rkimber (114)
9/5/2006 12:09:14 PM
Richard Kimber <rkimber@ntlworld.com> writes:

>Yves Bellefeuille wrote:

>> On Sun, 03 Sep 2006, Ignoramus24818 wrote:
>> 
>>> Please report which one worked most easily. I would like high
>>> resolution. I will be using one for mostly taking a lot of single
>>> shot pictures with command line.
>> 
>> If you're looking for a specific suggestion for a webcam to buy, tell us
>> where you're located. I can tell you of a specific model that you can
>> easily buy in Ottawa, Canada, and that works for me with Fedora 4, but I
>> have no idea if it's available in Tucson or in Germany.

>I don't understand the geographical point. Are there not generally available
>models that work anywhere, as with most other peripherals? I thought that
>the OP was just asking for a selection of models that were known to work,

So you not only want the people to tell you what works for them but also
whether it is available all over the world, and especially in the little
corner grocery store where you buy your computer supplies. Is that not
asking for a lot. 

>from which he would then make his choice.

Yes, and Bellefeuille told him that he could give him a model which he knew
was available in Ottawa  and works for him in Fedora 4. If you does not
want that information, that is up to him.

Note that there are many things which are available in Ottawa and are not
available in Tehran. 



>- Richard.

0
unruh-spam (2990)
9/5/2006 12:17:11 PM
Unruh wrote:

> So you not only want the people to tell you what works for them but also
> whether it is available all over the world, and especially in the little
> corner grocery store where you buy your computer supplies. Is that not
> asking for a lot.

No.  Just what works. Buying it is the individual's problem.  My point is
that a simple question was asked and the answers seemed to prevaricate.  If
someone asks about, say, a graphics card, the answer might be Matrox P650,
or GeForce 7600, or something.  The user can then Google for whichever
sounds good.

>>from which he would then make his choice.
> 
> Yes, and Bellefeuille told him that he could give him a model which he
> knew
> was available in Ottawa  and works for him in Fedora 4. If you does not
> want that information, that is up to him.

Isn't it more helpful to say what the model is?

> Note that there are many things which are available in Ottawa and are not
> available in Tehran.

I've bought stuff from all over the world, including Canada, without ever
going there.

- Richard.

0
rkimber (114)
9/5/2006 3:09:14 PM
Henrik Carlqvist wrote:
> Ignoramus24818 <ignoramus24818@NOSPAM.24818.invalid> wrote:
>> Please report which one worked most easily. I would like high
>> resolution. I will be using one for mostly taking a lot of single
>> shot pictures with command line. 
> 
> www.elphel.com has cameras connected directly to the net with resolutions
> above 3 megapixels. On sourceforge they also have a live-CD based on
> knoppix linux which can be used to control their cameras.
> 
> regards Henrik

OOF!  But the camera + lens tops US$1K....  A bit steep for the general 
user.

I've been looking for a basic snapshot (not streaming) camera that I can 
use for taking a few snapshots every 15 minutes.  I have my app working 
with a webcam (a Logitech Quickcam) but it is washed out in bright 
sunlight.  Apparently webcams are made to work with indoor light 
balance, and simply cannot handle bright sunlight.  I already have 
filters, but webcams also fuzz out due to a lack of filtering for UV/IR. 
  I'm going to try some really dark window tint which is supposed to 
block both UV and IR, but I don't hold out much hope.

So I'd like to find a simple camera, either ethernet or USB, that I can 
can use to take a snapshot through a car windshield via a command line 
interface.

Thanks,

--Yan
0
yan (1424)
9/5/2006 3:49:24 PM
Reply: