Re: automagic brightness
> In a response i got from scott, i think he said that the camera returned
> some brightness value?
I'm not sure -- I suspect I misread something from Russell. I haven't
seen one anywhere yet, but I haven't been checking return values
everywhere, and we still don't know what several commands do.
I'm probably going to add a stub for a brightness-adjuster in my next
release. I don't know if it'll do anything :-), but at least the stub
will be there. Hopefully that will promote some progress.
On an almost completely unrelated note, I spent some time yesterday
seeing what happens when you take several images of a still object and
then sum the result. I have a few sample images that are a lot clearer
than a normal 6-bit scan. Nothing really unexpected, of course, but
the repeated scans average out the noise in the scan and produce a much
better picture. I might add a "multi-scan and average" mode to qcam in
the near future if anyone's interested.
I then tried to see what happens when you try to use the QuickCam in
the dark. I turned out the lights, and turned off the monitor, and
discovered that a sum of 100 consecutive scans can almost make out
things in the dark. I had to use the color editor in xv before I could
see anything, but in the end I could make our both of my bookshelves
and most of the books on one of them. This was similar to what I could
see with my eyes a few seconds after turning off the lights. Those of
you with cameras pointing out windows might want to try this for your
The big problem was that the image seems to fade to white if you don't
read it fast enough. Has anyone else noticed this? I've seen it when
I've tried using qcam with a lot of debugging code added -- the picture
keeps getting lighter and lighter as you wait, so you end up with a
scan that's a lot darker at the top then at the bottom. When you're
trying to resolve nearly black images it doesn't take much fading to
destroy what little signal there is. I'll let others speculate why
this happens :-).
> BTW: does anyone know if connectix is aware of this driver yet?
They're aware of it. I haven't heard from them, but I do have a copy
of the FTP logs from nas.com, and two people from connectix.com have
accessed the ftp archives. I don't know *what* they accessed, but I
don't think there's anything else of substance on the site. I mean,
the FTP usage has more than tripled since I put qcam there. Is anyone
from connectix.com on the mailing list?
Scott A. Laird | "But this goes to 18,446,744,073,709,551,615"
email@example.com | - Nigel on his new 64-bit computer