[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: NetworkEye/270v1.1 disappoints
On Fri, 6 Jun 1997, Samuel J. MacDowell wrote:
> "The frame or refresh rate ... :
> Java (the conversion is made by an applet)
> 360 x 240 up to 4.0 s/frame
> 160 x 120 up to 2.0 s/frame
> 80 x 60 up to 1.5 s/frame
>
> JPEG Direct (new issue in version 1.1)
> 360 x 240 up to 30.0 s/frame
> 160 x 120 up to 8.5 s/frame
> 80 x 60 up to 3.5 s/frame"
>
> I'd suppose that a dedicated hardware performance
> should be better !
> With a nph script I'd achieved a
> speed twice faster, running:
>
> Patrick Reynolds <patrickr@virginia.edu>'s cqcam-0.40
> Alex Belits abelits@phobos.illtel.denver.co.us' qcread-0.1
>
> Unfortunately no other drive avaiable for the
> color cam succeeded on my Linux box.
qcread + qcwebcam allow up to 0.8-0.9 fps for 320x240 color jpegs on
fast enough box, but that's close to the physical limit for transfer
through parallel port using quickcam's interface without their still
unusable for me compression.
--
Alex
P.S. Yes, I know, I should write FAQ part about webcams, programming docs
on qcwebcam, add filters/color-exposure-self-adjustment code to qcread,
and speed up file operations in fhttpd. I hope to do at least some of that
this weekend.
References: