On Mon, 29 Jan 1996, Jon Lewis wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Jan 1996, James Walter Martin III wrote:
> I'm using version 1.02...and it fails to find the camera 4/5 times. I'm
> running on a 486dx-33 on 1.2.11. BTW...I can only get about 1.2fps at
> full res/quality. At min res/quality, I can get 19fps.
With xfqcam 1.02 recompiled with -O2, I get >32 fps at 80x60/64 shade
resolution. Around 4 fps at 320x240...
One more thing I've noticed about xfqcam vs. Doze's QuickPic - the zoom
While the Doze version zooms the center of the current view, xfqcam zooms
the upper right corner of it. Like thus: (I hope you appreciate my ANSI
| Normal | | | |
| __________ | | Zoomed | |
| | | | |__________| |
| | Zoomed | | | |
| |__________| | | Normal |
| | | |
Maybe a peek at the source would reveal something. Is there any sort of
offset that can be used? Such as "Only send the info constrained by this
set of coordinates" calls to teh camera?
Brandon High http://www.ccnet.com/~bjhigh Down with Big Brother!
firstname.lastname@example.org email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org
It is because of people like you that they must lock morgues at night.
- Re: XFqcam
- From: Ken Edwards <email@example.com>
- Re: XFqcam
- From: Jon Lewis <firstname.lastname@example.org>