HobbyKing.com New Products Flash Sale
Closed Thread
Thread Tools
Old May 14, 2011, 10:48 AM
Dance the skies...
Tom Frank's Avatar
United States, MA, Walpole
Joined Dec 2003
17,731 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by allelectrik View Post
Air crash,

appreciate the summary.....lots of material in this thread....hard for a newbie to sort it all out

Thank you
That's why newbies should read the first three posts as a MINIMUM, as it says in the thread title!
Tom Frank is offline Find More Posts by Tom Frank
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Old May 14, 2011, 10:54 AM
Dance the skies...
Tom Frank's Avatar
United States, MA, Walpole
Joined Dec 2003
17,731 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by air_crash View Post
10K to 7K video quality.

There IS a difference.

The 10K video is crisp and clear while the 7K is a bit blurry, like the lens is a bit out of focus.

I had compared my two cameras. With a different firmware, and different memory card.
So there was nothing common.
At first thought I said that one camera has a focus problem, especially at the right lower corner.

Well, that`s not true.
Actually the video of this camera was in 7K and there was a moving object at the right lower corner.
This is why the right lower corner seems out of focus.
In some other videos still the camera performed like it was the whole picture out of focus, compared to the other (that recorded at 10K).

So, I shot a video while having the same camera, the same memory card, the camera at the same point, etc.
First I shot a video at 10K.
Then went into photo mode, took a shot, forced the camera into 7K and shot a video at the same angle.
The difference is there!
Have you compared BOTH cameras with each using 7K and 10K? It's very likely your two cameras do not have equal focus. But if you're happy with the much larger file sizes and can see a difference in the two bit rates in your videos, then go for it! Your eyes are better than mine!
Tom Frank is offline Find More Posts by Tom Frank
Old May 14, 2011, 11:09 AM
Registered User
Joined Feb 2011
246 Posts
Here are a couple of side-by-side bitrate tests I did. I used the same camera and one card formatted to produce 7 Mbps and another formatted to produce 10 Mbps. The tests were a couple minutes apart, of course, so the lighting wasn't identical, but I think it's close. Which side do you think is which bitrate?



RogerDH is offline Find More Posts by RogerDH
Old May 14, 2011, 11:17 AM
Registered User
jims123's Avatar
USA, CA, San Diego 92120
Joined Oct 2007
3,088 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by RogerDH View Post
Here are a couple of side-by-side bitrate tests I did. I used the same camera and one card formatted to produce 7 Mbps and another formatted to produce 10 Mbps. The tests were a couple minutes apart, of course, so the lighting wasn't identical, but I think it's close. Which side do you think is which bitrate?
it's 10 on Top of course..

Roger, kidding aside .. these two side by side pic pairs look 100% identical to me.. so I guess you can infer the videos would be the same but in Tom's earlier video tests i could not see a difference in them either..
jims123 is offline Find More Posts by jims123
Old May 14, 2011, 11:24 AM
Just thumbing through...
victapilot's Avatar
United States, SC, Simpsonville
Joined Feb 2009
4,429 Posts
They look the same. IF there is any difference it might be seen by looking at the size of the key (I) frames and the intermediary frames. If the key frames are bigger, that would mean less compression. If the intermediary frames are bigger there could be less blurring during panning or other motion.
victapilot is offline Find More Posts by victapilot
Old May 14, 2011, 11:31 AM
Registered User
Joined Feb 2011
246 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by victapilot View Post
They look the same. IF there is any difference it might be seen by looking at the size of the key (I) frames and the intermediary frames. If the key frames are bigger, that would mean less compression. If the intermediary frames are bigger there could be less blurring during panning or other motion.
Do you know of any software that shows individual frame stats? Bigger I-frames would mean less compression, yes, but I think the issue is whether or not that necessarily means better quality -- with these cameras, at least.
RogerDH is offline Find More Posts by RogerDH
Old May 14, 2011, 11:32 AM
Registered User
United States, CA, San Ramon
Joined Apr 2011
96 Posts
I would say left is 10 and right is 7. Left looks slightly more clear.
xamindar is offline Find More Posts by xamindar
Old May 14, 2011, 11:43 AM
Registered User
Joined Oct 2009
226 Posts
Date stamp

Quote:
Originally Posted by allelectrik View Post
air crash,

I'm new with the aerial photo but it looks like fun. want to velcro one to my plane.

went to hxelepro360 site....which package are you guys buying?

can this format be edited with the Microsoft Movie Maker, Windows 7?

will the Microsoft Media Player play the video?

what capacity sd card is best?
Ask DIANA to remove the date stamp, if you want of course.

RUD
RUDDERLESS is offline Find More Posts by RUDDERLESS
Old May 14, 2011, 11:51 AM
Registered User
Joined May 2011
4 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by RogerDH View Post
Here are a couple of side-by-side bitrate tests I did. I used the same camera and one card formatted to produce 7 Mbps and another formatted to produce 10 Mbps. The tests were a couple minutes apart, of course, so the lighting wasn't identical, but I think it's close. Which side do you think is which bitrate?
In the first Scene the edge (bottom right corner) on the second picture is much sharper. --> 10MB right
But in the second scene I think the roof of the house is sharper on the first picture. --> 10MB left
Hd808Fan is offline Find More Posts by Hd808Fan
Old May 14, 2011, 11:53 AM
Just thumbing through...
victapilot's Avatar
United States, SC, Simpsonville
Joined Feb 2009
4,429 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by RogerDH View Post
Do you know of any software that shows individual frame stats?
I use Bitrate Viewer v 2.2. (freeware). You can zoom in, or scan across the video. The stats for each frame shown at the cursor position. Finds skipped frames too, but you should not get that with #11
victapilot is offline Find More Posts by victapilot
Old May 14, 2011, 12:17 PM
Dance the skies...
Tom Frank's Avatar
United States, MA, Walpole
Joined Dec 2003
17,731 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by RogerDH View Post
Do you know of any software that shows individual frame stats? Bigger I-frames would mean less compression, yes, but I think the issue is whether or not that necessarily means better quality -- with these cameras, at least.
Thanks for posting the examples.

You can load the native video from the camera into AviDemux editor and step through frame-by-frame, and in the bottom footer it will show the Frame Type, either I or P frames. The I frames come every 15 frames. You can't get stats for any one frame with this program, but step through from one I frame to the next at a point in the video where there is virtually no motion. When you are at the frame just before the next I frame, look very closely as some high detail point in the frame, then step to the next (I) frame. You should see a slight, but visible, increase in detail, as you would expect since it is a complete frame as recorded, and not a progression of 14 reconstructed frames of lesser and lesser detail. The point is that any one frame can show some detail that looks very slightly different from a frame before or after it, even if it is NOT an I frame, just because a very minute bit of movement changes the image (and compression). So comparing individual frames as you did may not tell the whole story. It could show the left image sharper in one frame, and the right image in the next, depending on which frame is selected.

I think if you had the two videos playing side-by-side, with the motion of a hand held (or worse, aerial) video, whatever minute differences that might be discerned in a frame comparison such as you did would melt into obscurity, and there would be no visible difference between the two. I can see a V E R Y slight difference between the two frames you selected in the upper photo, but not in the lower. If I only had 1/30th of a sec. to "see" each one, I'd see no difference at all!

Thanks for posting the examples.
Tom Frank is offline Find More Posts by Tom Frank
Old May 14, 2011, 12:23 PM
Dance the skies...
Tom Frank's Avatar
United States, MA, Walpole
Joined Dec 2003
17,731 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hd808Fan View Post
In the first Scene the edge (bottom right corner) on the second picture is much sharper. --> 10MB right
But in the second scene I think the roof of the house is sharper on the first picture. --> 10MB left
I saw that as well, but the corner-to-corner focus on these inexpensive cameras is not uniform. So differences in sharpness in different parts of the frame will vary even if the bit rate does not. I had one that I returned where the CMOS chip was not seated firmly in it's holder, and the entire upper edge of the image was slightly blurred.
Tom Frank is offline Find More Posts by Tom Frank
Old May 14, 2011, 12:44 PM
Registered User
jims123's Avatar
USA, CA, San Diego 92120
Joined Oct 2007
3,088 Posts
Ar No 11's back in Stock?

A friend of mine asked last night about getting a HD Keycam and I immediately pointed him to your FAQ vendors.. and cautioned that there might be a temp stock shortage right now.. do we know yet if that "bad batch " of PC cards problem cleared up yet? .. or which vendors can still ship immediately? or are they pretty much all sold out ? I am sure many will allow you to place an order.. but I hope those that can't ship will advise why right away and provide options..
jims123 is offline Find More Posts by jims123
Old May 14, 2011, 12:58 PM
Registered User
Colorado Mountains
Joined Aug 2010
331 Posts
To me, Top Left and bottom right are 10MB
zrobbie is offline Find More Posts by zrobbie
Old May 14, 2011, 01:25 PM
Registered User
Joined Feb 2011
246 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Frank View Post
You can load the native video from the camera into AviDemux editor and step through frame-by-frame, and in the bottom footer it will show the Frame Type, either I or P frames.
Ah, cool! I've redone the comparisons, this time making sure that I used I-frames for all 4 samples. Maybe I changed the order, and maybe I didn't so take another look:



RogerDH is offline Find More Posts by RogerDH
Old May 14, 2011, 01:35 PM
Registered User
Joespeeder's Avatar
Davison, MI
Joined Sep 2007
1,221 Posts
Hey Guys,

Quick video from a flight this morning. I went to an event near Detroit called Watts Over Wetzel.

Alas my good friend and I were lowish and slowish, touched and re-kitted both a Twister and my P3 F-16. Good news is it on Keyfob O Rama Cam both front and rear. I wont get to editing that video till last tomorrow or first of the week.

The event was rained out but we flew anyways. You can see tha haze. But once again flying in "Sun light" make me smile as the exposure firmware has a chance to work.

Better flights from today to follow. This is the event overview.


Watts Over Wetzel 2011 (2 min 42 sec)



Joe
Joespeeder is offline Find More Posts by Joespeeder
Old May 14, 2011, 01:42 PM
Dance the skies...
Tom Frank's Avatar
United States, MA, Walpole
Joined Dec 2003
17,731 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by RogerDH View Post
Ah, cool! I've redone the comparisons, this time making sure that I used I-frames for all 4 samples. Maybe I changed the order, and maybe I didn't so take another look:
...
They look even more identical than they did before to my eye, and I'll stand by my contention that if these frames were played back at 30 fps, there would be no noticeable difference in the video to me, and I'd be wasting about 43% of my flash card memory with no payback, not to mention that some PCs with less memory/processor speed than mine would struggle harder to reconstruct the frames at 30 fps during playback, possible causing some stuttering on an older machine.
Tom Frank is offline Find More Posts by Tom Frank
Old May 14, 2011, 01:54 PM
Dance the skies...
Tom Frank's Avatar
United States, MA, Walpole
Joined Dec 2003
17,731 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by jims123 View Post
A friend of mine asked last night about getting a HD Keycam and I immediately pointed him to your FAQ vendors.. and cautioned that there might be a temp stock shortage right now.. do we know yet if that "bad batch " of PC cards problem cleared up yet? .. or which vendors can still ship immediately? or are they pretty much all sold out ? I am sure many will allow you to place an order.. but I hope those that can't ship will advise why right away and provide options..
I have no idea... the best way to find out is to post that question on the vendor's eBay site(s). Most reply back fast if their store is "open" and hxelepro365 often replies to messages during off hours as well.
Tom Frank is offline Find More Posts by Tom Frank
Old May 14, 2011, 02:06 PM
Registered User
Ελλάς, Αττική, Αθήνα
Joined Apr 2011
316 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Frank View Post
Have you compared BOTH cameras with each using 7K and 10K? It's very likely your two cameras do not have equal focus. But if you're happy with the much larger file sizes and can see a difference in the two bit rates in your videos, then go for it! Your eyes are better than mine!
No, I used the very same camera and only one card.
Just went to 7K by taking a photo.

The difference is quite big. I would say so big that it worths more than a few cheap GB used.

The files are here: http://hotfile.com/dl/117819389/8339...rison.rar.html

You can see the difference in the leaves of the trees, even if they are not still, the diff to the upper right corner where there are some far objects, the difference to the center where the building is.
There is difference to the whole area, to the still objects, to the moving objects, to the objects that are close, to the objects that are in a medium distance and to the objects that are far away.
This means there is not any situation where 7K is close to 10K.

In a few words:
10K has a crisp and clear picture where 7K is blurry like it is with poor focus.


PS. I used VLC as a player.
air_crash is offline Find More Posts by air_crash
Last edited by air_crash; May 14, 2011 at 02:12 PM.
Old May 14, 2011, 02:23 PM
Registered User
Joined Feb 2011
246 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Frank View Post
They look even more identical than they did before to my eye, and I'll stand by my contention that if these frames were played back at 30 fps, there would be no noticeable difference in the video to me, and I'd be wasting about 43% of my flash card memory with no payback, not to mention that some PCs with less memory/processor speed than mine would struggle harder to reconstruct the frames at 30 fps during playback, possible causing some stuttering on an older machine.
What I was seeing looking at several sets of comparisons was small, apparently random differences, i.e. one part of the frame would look better on one side but a few frames later the other side would look better in that same area, so the bitrate didn't seem to be contributing anything significant. For the first sets I posted, I tried to pick frames that looked fairly well focused, overall, but there's not much chance they were all I-frames. Looking at the just-I-frame sets, the only real differences I can see seem to be due to lighting. I now think that the random differences in processing P-frames is larger than any real difference in image quality.
RogerDH is offline Find More Posts by RogerDH
Old May 14, 2011, 03:25 PM
Registered User
Joined May 2011
34 Posts
Hi all,

I'm still having problems with powering my camera while recording.

I've read the startpost, I've read the post about the special cable but still don't think that's all there is to it.

I own 2 of the single AA power devices. These have worked for me 100% of the time. Just plug in the camera, power it up and you can start recording while connected to the single AA power device.

However, I've got 2 differend solar power devices also. The package contained a USB cable (one with mini-usb which goes into the solar power device and also a normal USB cable, both whith a bunch of connectors for different kinds of mobile phones but also both with a mini USB connector)

This evening I was trying the powering again and with 1 mini USB plug connected to one other mini USB cable, provided with one of my solar chargers, I could power my camera and then start recording (just like the single AA power device).
Also I have 4 short USB to mini USB cables. Just one of them also worked.

But for some reson after some testing with different cables and with different combinations of power devices, cables and cables with attachable plugs, my camera refused to power up again, also after 5 minutes so I gave it a reset (reset button).

Now I just can't get the previously working cables to work again

BTW: I opened one of the working connectors. In the connector is a red cable to pin1 of the mini-usb. A black cable is connected to pin 5 and also to a 320k resistor (orange/red/yellow/gold bands) which is connected to pin 4 (aka pin x).

Why on earth is a cable sometimes working and sometimes not?
wfvn is offline Find More Posts by wfvn
Old May 14, 2011, 03:31 PM
Fidler & twidler
empeabee's Avatar
Cranfield U.K.
Joined Mar 2004
4,014 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by RogerDH View Post
Ah, cool! I've redone the comparisons, this time making sure that I used I-frames for all 4 samples. Maybe I changed the order, and maybe I didn't so take another look:


Well chaps. as far as I can tell its 6 of one and half a dozen of the other.
Mind you, I'll not see 70 again so my eyes are less sharp than you lot's
Mike
empeabee is offline Find More Posts by empeabee
Old May 14, 2011, 04:28 PM
Dance the skies...
Tom Frank's Avatar
United States, MA, Walpole
Joined Dec 2003
17,731 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by RogerDH View Post
What I was seeing looking at several sets of comparisons was small, apparently random differences, i.e. one part of the frame would look better on one side but a few frames later the other side would look better in that same area, so the bitrate didn't seem to be contributing anything significant. For the first sets I posted, I tried to pick frames that looked fairly well focused, overall, but there's not much chance they were all I-frames. Looking at the just-I-frame sets, the only real differences I can see seem to be due to lighting. I now think that the random differences in processing P-frames is larger than any real difference in image quality.
Roger, you've described it perfectly. A very small movement from one frame to the next makes the compression algorithm work a little differently with each frame, and a one frame step can create enough artifacts in the image detail that over-rides any focus or bit rate contributions. What maybe would help would be an adjustment of the H.264 codec parameters the camera's video processor uses so that key (I) frames are generated a lot more frequently than every 15 frames. That's one change in file size I would be willing to accept.
Tom Frank is offline Find More Posts by Tom Frank
Old May 14, 2011, 04:56 PM
Registered User
Joined Feb 2011
246 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by air_crash View Post
In a few words:
10K has a crisp and clear picture where 7K is blurry like it is with poor focus.
Your 10 Mbps video does look sharper, but looking at enlarged sections, it appears to have had more digital sharpening applied. Digital sharpening can't really sharpen, but it does make things look sharper by exaggerating differences at boundaries. But that has the effect of sometimes creating bright lines (or halos) on the edges of brighter areas where they meet meet darker areas, and sometimes a dark edge on the darker area. On small scattered highlights like leaves, digital sharpening tends to "blow out" the highlights, making them appear more pixelated or concentrated:



Maybe slightly different lighting conditions cause different processing in the camera?
RogerDH is offline Find More Posts by RogerDH
Old May 14, 2011, 05:59 PM
Just thumbing through...
victapilot's Avatar
United States, SC, Simpsonville
Joined Feb 2009
4,429 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by air_crash View Post
10K has a crisp and clear picture where 7K is blurry like it is with poor focus.


PS. I used VLC as a player.
I looked at your 10K file, it's crystal clear - best I've seen I believe. It shows as having a bitrate of over 13k, both the I frames and P frames are bigger than most. The P frames might be influence by the leaves blowing in the wind. but in any case its great. Here's what Bitrate viewer gives, compared with the 7K "crossing the bridge" vendor sample.

I didn't find your 7K sample, but trust you

Scaling of the graphs is automatic, look at the numbers. I parked the cursor on a typical P frame
victapilot is offline Find More Posts by victapilot
Old May 14, 2011, 06:03 PM
Registered User
Joined Feb 2011
246 Posts
To illustrate what I mean, the pic on the left below has been digitally sharpened (in PaintShopPro), and it now shows artifacts similar to those on the right:

RogerDH is offline Find More Posts by RogerDH
Old May 14, 2011, 06:46 PM
Livin it UP when Im goin DOWN
Arcteryxxx's Avatar
Norway, Telemark, Skien
Joined Feb 2010
4,353 Posts
I'm more into flying than Cam science....
Here's a video taken with my #11 Cam:
Stryker Fun Part II (2 min 38 sec)
Arcteryxxx is offline Find More Posts by Arcteryxxx
Old May 14, 2011, 07:41 PM
Registered User
Colorado Mountains
Joined Aug 2010
331 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Frank View Post
They look even more identical than they did before to my eye, and I'll stand by my contention that if these frames were played back at 30 fps, there would be no noticeable difference in the video to me, and I'd be wasting about 43% of my flash card memory with no payback, not to mention that some PCs with less memory/processor speed than mine would struggle harder to reconstruct the frames at 30 fps during playback, possible causing some stuttering on an older machine.
I had more trouble telling the difference this time also. I put the top left at 10MB. The bottom set were even more difficult but I put the left at 10MB but mostly a guess.
zrobbie is offline Find More Posts by zrobbie
Old May 14, 2011, 07:58 PM
Dance the skies...
Tom Frank's Avatar
United States, MA, Walpole
Joined Dec 2003
17,731 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arcteryxxx View Post
I'm more into flying than Cam science....
Here's a video taken with my #11 Cam:
...
Nice vid with different camera angles. The bungee launch sure looks strange with an aft facing camera view and no prop spinning! Your camera has perfect focus and depth of field in the views!
Tom Frank is offline Find More Posts by Tom Frank
Last edited by Tom Frank; May 14, 2011 at 08:04 PM.
Old May 14, 2011, 10:27 PM
eat, sleep, FLY FLY FLY
Mr.frankenjet's Avatar
Charlottesville, VA
Joined Jun 2005
1,069 Posts
upload

so what is the prefered format to upload video ? I have used Vimo in the past , what is the best way to get the smallest size with the best quality WMM ? FINALLY got some vid to upload
Mr.frankenjet is offline Find More Posts by Mr.frankenjet
Old May 14, 2011, 10:36 PM
Registered User
United States, CA, San Ramon
Joined Apr 2011
96 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.frankenjet View Post
so what is the prefered format to upload video ? I have used Vimo in the past , what is the best way to get the smallest size with the best quality WMM ? FINALLY got some vid to upload
If youtube, it prefers the same format that these cameras record in so no conversion is necessary.
xamindar is offline Find More Posts by xamindar
Old May 14, 2011, 11:00 PM
Dance the skies...
Tom Frank's Avatar
United States, MA, Walpole
Joined Dec 2003
17,731 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.frankenjet View Post
so what is the prefered format to upload video ? I have used Vimo in the past , what is the best way to get the smallest size with the best quality WMM ? FINALLY got some vid to upload
For uploading, you can send any format... the native file will have the highest quality since they re-encode in flash format when they get it.

For personal use, encoding with h.264 codec will give highest quality with smallest file, but you can't do that with WMM. Avidemux editor will import the raw .mov clip and output with h.264 if you select it. Best quality when you set the output average video bit rate to be the same as the native video. You can check that from the histogram chart in Avidemux.
Tom Frank is offline Find More Posts by Tom Frank
Old May 14, 2011, 11:51 PM
Registered User
Chile, Santiago Metropolitan Region, Stgo
Joined Feb 2011
9 Posts
Bitrate question

I was playing with my just arrived camera (#11 from hxelepro360, bought 7 days ago, arrived today), everything works as expected except windows 7 media player shows the videos as corrupted and sometimes crashes: I have to transform them to MP4(XVID) to see them, probably I'm missing a good H.264 codec.

My card (4Gb trascend CL6) saved first video at ~10Mbps, then I formatted it with SDformatter and every video afterwards was ~7Mbps, as expected. I wanted to see if I could get it back to ~10Mbps "capable" and I could by formatting it using windows format dialog to use 4096kb clusters.

Problem: now I don't know what bitrate I rather use!!!

This is my question:
Why are some of you saying more frames might be dropped at higher bitrate?

I'm not an expert, but it seems to me that at any given bitrate 30 frames can be transfered to the card depending only on the quality (compression) of the frames. 30 fps at higher bitrate are 30fps with more data in them (even if that extra data is just better resolved noise from the camera in this case...).

Therefore, at least in theory, video quality should be better at a higher bitrate, because at a fixed fps more data is allocated per pixel. I agree in the case of this camera this might be just lower compression of a low quality image anyway.

My videos show 30 pics per second in gspot either at 7 or 10 mbps bitrate. If video length is not a concern for me, then I see no point using the lower bitrate. Am I missing something?

Hope it stops raining tomorrow here in Champaign to tape it to my Ultra Micro and record my first aereal videos!

Regards,
Ricardo.
rserpell is offline Find More Posts by rserpell
Old May 14, 2011, 11:54 PM
Registered User
Joined Mar 2011
32 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by RogerDH View Post
Maybe slightly different lighting conditions cause different processing in the camera?
That certainly has been my experience. I still get the very occasional (perhaps 1 in 25) video recorded at a bitrate over 10 mpbs, but the average is around 6.5.


I wonder if this sort of variable bitrate recording uses more processor resources and consequently battery power? The audio bitrate is pretty high too, at 512 kbps, considering it's only mono, with a sampling frequency of only 32 Khz. Audio stream accounts for 7% of filesize.


I believe we'd obtain significant gains in clarity and resolution if the manufacturers switched to a lens with better optics (maybe glass). I wonder if something like the rear lens used in the iPod touch 4th G would work?
drzen is offline Find More Posts by drzen
Old May 15, 2011, 12:02 AM
Registered User
Ελλάς, Αττική, Αθήνα
Joined Apr 2011
316 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by rserpell View Post
This is my question:
Why are some of you saying more frames might be dropped at higher bitrate?
A few posts ago I had said it might drop some frames at higher bitrate and I also said I have to test it.
Bottleneck could be the problem to drop frames. Bottleneck to the camera or to the card.

But my tests -it is not only this video I uploaded, there are a lot- show that at least in my case I don`t have a dropped frames issue even at 10K.
air_crash is offline Find More Posts by air_crash
Old May 15, 2011, 12:07 AM
Registered User
jims123's Avatar
USA, CA, San Diego 92120
Joined Oct 2007
3,088 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by rserpell View Post
I see no point using the lower bitrate. Am I missing something?
Regards,
Ricardo.
Hello Ricardo..
i can't personally see any difference in the video quality recorded in 7vs 10 MBs /s so the main reason for formatting to set it at 7 is to simply save on the memory capacity if using a smaller card or a backup battery this can become more important.. I tell you honestly if I want to take a high quality video .. I'm not going to use this little $40 cam anyway.. I'm going to use a decent camcorder with better optical performance and AVHCD .. but for RC apps it's pretty near perfect for today.. tomorrow I'll want and expect twice the perfomance for half the price and size cause its all improving exponentially.. I Hope you get some great video with your new toy

Regards, JimS
jims123 is offline Find More Posts by jims123
Old May 15, 2011, 12:09 AM
Registered User
Ελλάς, Αττική, Αθήνα
Joined Apr 2011
316 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by RogerDH View Post
Maybe slightly different lighting conditions cause different processing in the camera?
It is not only this video.
Every video I shot for testing at 10K is superior to the 7K one.

I could agree that for an aerial video the visual difference could be negligible, as there is a lot of motion and very long distance.
But I can`t tell for sure, as I have not tested.
air_crash is offline Find More Posts by air_crash
Old May 15, 2011, 12:26 AM
Registered User
Chile, Santiago Metropolitan Region, Stgo
Joined Feb 2011
9 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by jims123 View Post
... but for RC apps it's pretty near perfect for today.. tomorrow I'll want and expect twice the perfomance for half the price and size cause its all improving exponentially.. I Hope you get some great video with your new toy

Regards, JimS
Thanks Jim,

You are right, if it had only 5 mbps bitrate I would still be jumping in happiness to be able to film HD aereal videos for under $40!! The problem for obsesives like me is "having the option to tweak it" (I whish I never knew, now I see myself running countless "tests" ). Well it's the same with planes , I guess is part of the hobby.
rserpell is offline Find More Posts by rserpell
Old May 15, 2011, 12:36 AM
Registered User
Ελλάς, Αττική, Αθήνα
Joined Apr 2011
316 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by jims123 View Post
Hello Ricardo..
i can't personally see any difference in the video quality recorded in 7vs 10 MBs /s so the main reason for formatting to set it at 7 is to simply save on the memory capacity if using a smaller card or a backup battery this can become more important..
A decade ago I converted (transcode) my MiniDV videos to mpeg2.
Processor and hard disk did not let me do anything better than keep them in low quality. Of course I could keep the tapes for future transcoding to a better format/coder.

Half a decade ago I re-encode them or transcode them to mp4.
But kept the original video to the HDD as the HDDs were almost affordable (at least for me that I had 7 HDDs).

Now I don`t transcode them at all.
It is way cheaper to take a big HDD than buy a fast processor/memory. You don`t even need to upgrade all the time the processor/memory/mainboard. You just buy a cheap HDD.
It is faster also. As it does not take any time to store it, while transcoding even with the fastest PC takes a long time (compared to none of just store them).

My point is: Today GB is cheap. To the HDD or SD cards. No worries.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jims123 View Post
but for RC apps it's pretty near perfect for today.. tomorrow I'll want and expect twice the perfomance for half the price and size cause its all improving exponentially.. I Hope you get some great video with your new toy
Well for RC is great.
And for uploading a video you need as much as less file size. To save time and be able to upload a long video -as there is a limitation to the file size.
Then youtube will lower the quality anyway.
So in this case 7K is the way to go. I agree.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jims123 View Post
I'm not going to use this little $40 cam anyway.. I'm going to use a decent camcorder with better optical performance and AVHCD ..

I`ll use the #11 to my vacations. I want a lightweight, pocket size camera to shoot the videos.
I don`t want my old $2100 miniDV camera any more. It is heavy and big.
I don`t want to spend so much money any more. Not even more than $100. That`s why I have kept my old camera till now.
OK, a 808 has no zoom and no viewer. But no viewer means I can see the view rather be busy shooting and enjoy nothing but shooting. Zooming means to be more concentrated to the shooting.
I will also take a #8 camera as it is very good at low light. Better than my miniDV.
That`s why I`m concerned about getting the best out of it.

The 10K trick and the 10K visual comparison have been done so anyone who wants can make use of them.
I`m not trying to convince anyone to choose something it does not fit his needs.
air_crash is offline Find More Posts by air_crash
Old May 15, 2011, 12:39 AM
Dance the skies...
Tom Frank's Avatar
United States, MA, Walpole
Joined Dec 2003
17,731 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by rserpell View Post
I was playing with my just arrived camera (#11 from hxelepro360, bought 7 days ago, arrived today), everything works as expected except windows 7 media player shows the videos as corrupted and sometimes crashes: I have to transform them to MP4(XVID) to see them, probably I'm missing a good H.264 codec.

My card (4Gb trascend CL6) saved first video at ~10Mbps, then I formatted it with SDformatter and every video afterwards was ~7Mbps, as expected. I wanted to see if I could get it back to ~10Mbps "capable" and I could by formatting it using windows format dialog to use 4096kb clusters.

Problem: now I don't know what bitrate I rather use!!!

This is my question:
Why are some of you saying more frames might be dropped at higher bitrate?

I'm not an expert, but it seems to me that at any given bitrate 30 frames can be transfered to the card depending only on the quality (compression) of the frames. 30 fps at higher bitrate are 30fps with more data in them (even if that extra data is just better resolved noise from the camera in this case...).

Therefore, at least in theory, video quality should be better at a higher bitrate, because at a fixed fps more data is allocated per pixel. I agree in the case of this camera this might be just lower compression of a low quality image anyway.

My videos show 30 pics per second in gspot either at 7 or 10 mbps bitrate. If video length is not a concern for me, then I see no point using the lower bitrate. Am I missing something?

Hope it stops raining tomorrow here in Champaign to tape it to my Ultra Micro and record my first aereal videos!

Regards,
Ricardo.
You're not missing too much! First I wanted to tell you that if you are running W7 you are not missing the H.264 video codec. WMP should play the native #11 videos with no problems without re-encoding. So something else is going on. Do you have this problem with the videos recorded at the lower 7Mbps data rate? The higher 10Mbps data rate adds to the already high cpu processing time needed to decode the HD video back into visible frames, and some older PCs can struggle with this.

On the bit rate, when the light level drops, the camera has to keep it's electronic shutter open longer to get proper exposure, so there is less time to record all that data in each frame at 30 fps. With the bit rate jacked up, you will start dropping frames sooner than you will at 7 Mbps. I get significant dropped frames in normal room lighting at night (like 20+%) with a fast CL 6 flash card and the 7Mbps data rate. But the good news is this never happens in any kind of normal daytime lighting outside.

Gspot will still show 30 fps, even if a frame is dropped! You need to step through the video frame by frame to see when there is no change when you advance the frame. That is a dropped frame, and the prior frame stays on the display so it is very hard to see unless there is more than one dropped frame back to back.

The higher bit rate does, in theory, "improve" the pixel resolution, but you reach a point of no return where the increased data rate just can't make a change that is noticeable on a monitor in a video with lots of motion. Each frame is displayed in such a small time increment, that the next one replaces it with a different image, and your eye has a hard time seeing the better resolution. I've played back videos posted recently where there are visible improvements in a 13Mbps data rate vs a 7Mbps data rate when each frame is inspect visually as a still image. But when they are played back simulatneously, I can't really see any significant difference. The way the H.264 code compresses the images from one frame to the next, the rendering often adds artifacts that can make successive frames look better with one frame advance, then slightly worse in the next, then slightly better again, etc.

For me, there are more reasons to keep the lower data rate. But YMMV!
Along with the larger file size, the recording time your flash card can hold will also be decreased by the same (approx.) 43%. But if those drawbacks are not a concern to you, then go ahead and toggle the higher bit rate!
Tom Frank is offline Find More Posts by Tom Frank
Old May 15, 2011, 12:44 AM
Dance the skies...
Tom Frank's Avatar
United States, MA, Walpole
Joined Dec 2003
17,731 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by drzen View Post
...
I believe we'd obtain significant gains in clarity and resolution if the manufacturers switched to a lens with better optics (maybe glass). I wonder if something like the rear lens used in the iPod touch 4th G would work?
If you wish real hard, you may get your wish!
Tom Frank is offline Find More Posts by Tom Frank
Last edited by Tom Frank; May 15, 2011 at 12:51 AM.
Old May 15, 2011, 12:55 AM
eat, sleep, FLY FLY FLY
Mr.frankenjet's Avatar
Charlottesville, VA
Joined Jun 2005
1,069 Posts
1st run

So a rebuild of my slow fly and the new cam and the weather finally all came together. Here is a sunset flight with the latest firmwhere

cobweb05082011b (9 min 47 sec)


sorry no edit yet, you need to ff in the beginning a bit )
Mr.frankenjet is offline Find More Posts by Mr.frankenjet
Old May 15, 2011, 01:39 AM
Registered User
jims123's Avatar
USA, CA, San Diego 92120
Joined Oct 2007
3,088 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by air_crash View Post
..
I`m not trying to convince anyone to choose something it does not fit his needs.
Yes, I know.. I just think it's cool we can share tips and videos and ask questions about this neat little No 11 key cam.. and get really good advice from all over the globe. Sure there will be different opinions but that's great to hear all aspects.. I know I learned a lot since I got mine and asked a lot of questions and there seems to be no end to it..

in an couple months poor Tom will be writing FAQ's about how to find stuff in the FAQ's to help folks find all the cool stuff he and others documented about it.
jims123 is offline Find More Posts by jims123
Old May 15, 2011, 01:41 AM
Registered User
jims123's Avatar
USA, CA, San Diego 92120
Joined Oct 2007
3,088 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.frankenjet View Post
So a rebuild of my slow fly and the new cam and the weather finally all came together. Here is a sunset flight with the latest firmwhere

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z0hYENRhxwc

sorry no edit yet, you need to ff in the beginning a bit )
Looks great.. I though it was a rubber band plane for a while tho.. with a BIG pink prop .. but turned out, that wasn't the pointy end after all Nice takeoff's and landings!
jims123 is offline Find More Posts by jims123
Old May 15, 2011, 02:31 AM
Registered User
Ελλάς, Αττική, Αθήνα
Joined Apr 2011
316 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by jims123 View Post
in an couple months poor Tom will be writing FAQ's about how to find stuff in the FAQ's to help folks find all the cool stuff he and others documented about it.
Now you mention it I would like to say thanks to all the people contributed to this thread, as this is why (or how) I took the camera, and especially to the thread starter that not only started the thread but along with some other early posting members still posting useful and new info. And of course to Tom that keeps organizing it.
air_crash is offline Find More Posts by air_crash
Old May 15, 2011, 04:21 AM
Registered User
Giorg's Avatar
Italia, Lombardia, Milano
Joined May 2011
38 Posts
Hello everybody,

I've been following this thread for a while and now I have a little problem to solve.
I bricked one of my two camera while trying to upgrade the firmware. The camera was completely dead, i've tried every unbrick method I could find.
I've also desoldered the flash chip and tried to read it but I make a dumb mistake .. chip is probably fried because I supplied 5v instead of 3.5V.
Has anyone ever tried to read/write this kind of chip ? mine is a winbound 25q16

thank you all!
Giorg is offline Find More Posts by Giorg
Old May 15, 2011, 06:15 AM
Fidler & twidler
empeabee's Avatar
Cranfield U.K.
Joined Mar 2004
4,014 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.frankenjet View Post
So a rebuild of my slow fly and the new cam and the weather finally all came together. Here is a sunset flight with the latest firmwhere

sorry no edit yet, you need to ff in the beginning a bit )
That was a very nice flight, and you must be good friends with those trees - non of them jumped out & caught the plane with malicious intent
Thanks
Mike
empeabee is offline Find More Posts by empeabee
Old May 15, 2011, 06:30 AM
Fidler & twidler
empeabee's Avatar
Cranfield U.K.
Joined Mar 2004
4,014 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arcteryxxx View Post
I'm more into flying than Cam science....
Here's a video taken with my #11 Cam:
Late reply, had to download it to give it justice.
A very nice video. I enjoyed it a lot.
And I was surprised at how stable the colour / brightness was for a bare-foot #11 (V1 firmware), the lighting up there must suite the camera.
Keep 'em coming.
Mike
empeabee is offline Find More Posts by empeabee
Old May 15, 2011, 06:34 AM
Fidler & twidler
empeabee's Avatar
Cranfield U.K.
Joined Mar 2004
4,014 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Frank View Post
If you wish real hard, you may get your wish!
R U a Marketing Manager by trade then?
Mike - with blue tinges to the cuticles of my nails
empeabee is offline Find More Posts by empeabee
Old May 15, 2011, 09:15 AM
Registered User
jims123's Avatar
USA, CA, San Diego 92120
Joined Oct 2007
3,088 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Giorg View Post
Hello everybody,

I've been following this thread for a while and now I have a little problem to solve.
I bricked one of my two camera while trying to upgrade the firmware. The camera was completely dead, i've tried every unbrick method I could find.
I've also desoldered the flash chip and tried to read it but I make a dumb mistake .. chip is probably fried because I supplied 5v instead of 3.5V.
Has anyone ever tried to read/write this kind of chip ? mine is a winbound 25q16

thank you all!
Giorg,
Wow, gutsy move.. I would never try to de-solder anything but the battery, even then would cut and splice the two leads rather than try to de-solder any components on here.. MUCH less try to read what was in the flash chip.. what did you hope to find in it that is not already in the .bin file?.. I don't believe you damaged it with 5.o vdc but likely erased it.. how did you set up the clock and control pins to actually read the serial data.. i think By far the best bet is to send it back to your vendor if you want one of these cams replaced (cause they will simply toss it.. ) because aside from possibly swapping the battery or adjusting focus it's nearly impossible to do so.. the 25Q16 is one of the simpler chips.. but setting up all the conditions it needs would be a challenge and then what have you got when you succeed in reading it? binary gibberish.. What clock speed did you use to clock the data out?

http://www.alldatasheet.net/datashee...Q16-100GI.html
jims123 is offline Find More Posts by jims123
Last edited by jims123; May 15, 2011 at 09:20 AM.
Old May 15, 2011, 09:22 AM
Curiouser and curiouser
Kokopeli's Avatar
Rochester, NY, USA
Joined Oct 2005
2,062 Posts
Focus sensitivity?

I am getting ready to open my new #11 and play with the focus.
I would like to survey all of you that have done this to find out how sensitive I should expect the focus to be to my twisting and turning.
So, my questions is:
What is the smallest turn of the lens that you believe will have noticeable effect? 1/4 turn - 1/2 turn - 1/8 turn.
I will gather the opinions and post them.

Thanks,
Walt
Kokopeli is offline Find More Posts by Kokopeli
Old May 15, 2011, 09:35 AM
Registered User
jims123's Avatar
USA, CA, San Diego 92120
Joined Oct 2007
3,088 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by wjbite View Post
..
What is the smallest turn of the lens that you believe will have noticeable effect? 1/4 turn - 1/2 turn - 1/8 turn.
I will gather the opinions and post them.

Thanks,
Walt
Walt,
honestly I have never tried it, and I assume you would focus at around 20' to infinity .. I dunno?

I hope you don't mind but i have a related question ..is it possible to adjust a cam to set it up for doing close up (two to three feet" away) in-focus for how-to videos (only) at the expense of the normal distance shot..?
jims123 is offline Find More Posts by jims123
Old May 15, 2011, 10:03 AM
Registered User
Ελλάς, Αττική, Αθήνα
Joined Apr 2011
316 Posts
I would mark the initial adjustment and I would go in 1/16 steps.
I have seen that the focus adjustment on a #3 is way too sensitive. It is very easy to pass the right spot and go from poor focus to poor focus again. I can`t see why a #11 would be too different.
Of course you must compare at 10K recordings.

On the other hand I`m happy with the stock focus adjustment on my both #11.
air_crash is offline Find More Posts by air_crash
Old May 15, 2011, 10:56 AM
Curiouser and curiouser
Kokopeli's Avatar
Rochester, NY, USA
Joined Oct 2005
2,062 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by wjbite View Post
i am getting ready to open my new #11 and play with the focus.
I would like to survey all of you that have done this to find out how sensitive i should expect the focus to be to my twisting and turning.
So, my questions is:
What is the smallest turn of the lens that you believe will have noticeable effect? 1/4 turn - 1/2 turn - 1/8 turn.
I will gather the opinions and post them.

Thanks,
walt
whoops!
Shoulda known it - Tom has already answered my question
In post #3 there are links to post #508 and #587 that tells it all. LOL
He also discourages changing the focus unless it is proven that it is needed.
I guess I will take some snapshots and check it out.

Walt
Kokopeli is offline Find More Posts by Kokopeli
Last edited by Kokopeli; May 15, 2011 at 11:02 AM.
Old May 15, 2011, 12:44 PM
Registered User
Ελλάς, Αττική, Αθήνα
Joined Apr 2011
316 Posts
OK, I sold my both Sandisk Class 4 and ordered a Team 8GB Class 6 and a Kingston 8GB Class 4.
The Sandisk performed OK even for 10K recordings, the 8GB a little better than the 4GB though, but I wanted to try something else.
air_crash is offline Find More Posts by air_crash
Old May 15, 2011, 12:52 PM
Dance the skies...
Tom Frank's Avatar
United States, MA, Walpole
Joined Dec 2003
17,731 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by wjbite View Post
whoops!
Shoulda known it - Tom has already answered my question
In post #3 there are links to post #508 and #587 that tells it all. LOL
He also discourages changing the focus unless it is proven that it is needed.
I guess I will take some snapshots and check it out.

Walt
Walt, the camera does not take sharp still photos because they are upconverted (digitally zoomed/interpolated). Instead, take some sample video as I did and look at how sharp objects appear. Thin lines with sharp differences in color and contrast are good for this, like window frames, etc. I usually sometimes stop the video and step through frame by frame, looking at the prior lens video at the same time as the newly focused video. You can run two versions of Avidemux at the same time to do this. That way you can easily see which lens position is giving the better focus.
Tom Frank is offline Find More Posts by Tom Frank
Last edited by Tom Frank; May 15, 2011 at 01:07 PM.
Old May 15, 2011, 01:00 PM
Dance the skies...
Tom Frank's Avatar
United States, MA, Walpole
Joined Dec 2003
17,731 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by jims123 View Post
Walt,
honestly I have never tried it, and I assume you would focus at around 20' to infinity .. I dunno?

I hope you don't mind but i have a related question ..is it possible to adjust a cam to set it up for doing close up (two to three feet" away) in-focus for how-to videos (only) at the expense of the normal distance shot..?
Actually, with the very small aperature of the lens in the #11, the depth of field is very deep. With my lens well focused for distant objects, it also has very good focus up close (like a couple feet away or less). You can see this in the recent videos posted here as well, when the plane parts are quite sharp in the air along with the ground objects.
Tom Frank is offline Find More Posts by Tom Frank
Old May 15, 2011, 01:04 PM
Dance the skies...
Tom Frank's Avatar
United States, MA, Walpole
Joined Dec 2003
17,731 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by empeabee View Post
R U a Marketing Manager by trade then?
Mike - with blue tinges to the cuticles of my nails
No, but I know the person who IS! I'm expecting to hear some news about the #11 soon.
Tom Frank is offline Find More Posts by Tom Frank
Old May 15, 2011, 01:14 PM
Dance the skies...
Tom Frank's Avatar
United States, MA, Walpole
Joined Dec 2003
17,731 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Giorg View Post
Hello everybody,

I've been following this thread for a while and now I have a little problem to solve.
I bricked one of my two camera while trying to upgrade the firmware. The camera was completely dead, i've tried every unbrick method I could find.
I've also desoldered the flash chip and tried to read it but I make a dumb mistake .. chip is probably fried because I supplied 5v instead of 3.5V.
Has anyone ever tried to read/write this kind of chip ? mine is a winbound 25q16

thank you all!
This post is linked in the FAQs in Post #3. There's some resolution for you in there for a replacement chip, I think.
Tom Frank is offline Find More Posts by Tom Frank
Old May 15, 2011, 01:52 PM
Just thumbing through...
victapilot's Avatar
United States, SC, Simpsonville
Joined Feb 2009
4,429 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by RogerDH View Post
To illustrate what I mean, the pic on the left below has been digitally sharpened (in PaintShopPro), and it now shows artifacts similar to those on the right:
I used Avidemux to take a frame in BMP format. This is to avoid any compression artifact from the JPEG compression. I then took an enlarged sample, it's saved as 100% quality JPEG using Paint. I believe there is less apparent sharpening with this method, but maybe I'm wrong
victapilot is offline Find More Posts by victapilot
Old May 15, 2011, 02:15 PM
Registered User
Joined Feb 2011
246 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by air_crash View Post
The 10K trick and the 10K visual comparison have been done so anyone who wants can make use of them.
I`m not trying to convince anyone to choose something it does not fit his needs.
Your 10 Mbps version was definitely sharper than your 7 Mbps, which is something I just wasn't seeing with my tests, so I tried it the same way you were doing it: I used a card that will shoot at 10 Mbps first, then go to 7 Mbps after going to photo mode and shooting a jpg. (My cards have that same behavior if I format 4096-byte units with Win7.) Doing it that way instead of using different cards, I got the same results you did: The first video is sharper than the second. I've been experimenting trying to figure out why, and I've determined that the same thing happens if I use a card that always shoots at 7 Mbps: If I shoot a video, shoot a still, and shoot another video, then even though both videos are 7 Mbps, the first is sharper than the second. Also, in enlarged views, it appears to be the same thing going on that I noticed with your videos: The first video has more digital sharpening applied. This doesn't happen, however, if I just shoot consecutive videos; it only happens if I go to still photo mode and back.

So, my theory is that going to photo mode sets some different parameters for the digital sharpening algorithm (presumably values better suited to the interpolated images), but going back to video mode doesn't reset those parameters.
RogerDH is offline Find More Posts by RogerDH
Old May 15, 2011, 02:24 PM
Registered User
Joined Feb 2011
246 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by victapilot View Post
I used Avidemux to take a frame in BMP format. This is to avoid any compression artifact from the JPEG compression. I then took an enlarged sample, it's saved as 100% quality JPEG using Paint. I believe there is less apparent sharpening with this method, but maybe I'm wrong
Your enlarged view has been "resampled" after enlargement to smooth out the pixelated (jagged) edges. The enlarged view I posted was just a straight pixel enlargement with no smoothing, so you can see what's happening with individual pixels.
RogerDH is offline Find More Posts by RogerDH
Old May 15, 2011, 02:32 PM
Registered User
Ελλάς, Αττική, Αθήνα
Joined Apr 2011
316 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by RogerDH View Post
I've been experimenting trying to figure out why, and I've determined that the same thing happens if I use a card that always shoots at 7 Mbps: If I shoot a video, shoot a still, and shoot another video, then even though both videos are 7 Mbps, the first is sharper than the second.

So, my theory is that going to photo mode sets some different parameters for the digital sharpening algorithm (presumably values better suited to the interpolated images), but going back to video mode doesn't reset those parameters.
Very interesting.
Thanks for your effort on the 10K/7K matter.

I had compared two videos, one with a 10K formatted card and one with a 7K formatted card also, except of a comparison to a single card and going to 7K by photo mode.
There was still a difference.
I can`t recall if I shot a photo on only the 7K card. I think not as I would have done the same to both cards. But I can`t tell for sure.

I`ll try to replicate your tests.
air_crash is offline Find More Posts by air_crash
Old May 15, 2011, 03:37 PM
FPV Browncoat
prelator's Avatar
United States, CO, Parker
Joined Mar 2011
1,517 Posts
So I think I may have finally solved my problem with the camera cutting out in flight. I think the battery was bad, since it was just giving me wildly inconsistent times, and always died much more rapidly when the camera was in flight (probably because the camera uses more power when recording while moving than while sitting on a desk). I tried it with the original battery again yesterday and barely got 13 minutes out of it. So I finally worked up the courage to take a soldering iron to it to swap out the battery with the one from my broken cam. Then I flew again today and managed to record a complete flight including the landing for the first time all week. The flight was just under 17 minutes, so hopefully I'm good now.

And while I'm at it, I'll go ahead and post a music video I made out of one of my flights yesterday, recorded with the #11 cam (this was before I replaced the battery, so the the camera still quit before landing, though I got enough footage before that to make a video). The video was taken flying over the campus of my alma mater, Patrick Henry College.
Hawk Sky Over Patrick Henry College (Aerial Video) (4 min 14 sec)
prelator is offline Find More Posts by prelator
Old May 15, 2011, 04:11 PM
Registered User
Joined Nov 2010
2,546 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Giorg View Post
Hello everybody,

I've been following this thread for a while and now I have a little problem to solve.
I bricked one of my two camera while trying to upgrade the firmware. The camera was completely dead, i've tried every unbrick method I could find.
I've also desoldered the flash chip and tried to read it but I make a dumb mistake .. chip is probably fried because I supplied 5v instead of 3.5V.
Has anyone ever tried to read/write this kind of chip ? mine is a winbound 25q16

thank you all!
Yes. It's the same type as used in the #3, and it's easy to read/write if you have the proper programmer. You don't need any knowledge of the timing because the programmer does it all for you. You may need some grabbers or even a conversion socket if you do this more often.

Do an ebay search for "Nano Programmer" and you'll find what you need for $20 including shipping. Be warned that the software is good, but it pays havoc with your antivirus software (you have to disable the antivirus software). I used an old, dedicated PC for this. You also need a built-in Parallel port - not a USB conversion gizmo.

You can refer to an article I wrote about this programmer here. Don't worry, the article uses a GumPack, but the same method applies to the keychain. Ignore the first part because you have already done that. The wiring diagram using the external wiring adapter is much easier than connecting the dedicated socket, but note that you must bridge VCC and HOLD# (this was bridged internally on the #3). I just connected a grabber to both pin #7 and #8 (VCC and HOLD#). Also, use as short a cable as possible - this is not noted in the article.

Since you can apparently solder, maybe you could ask the eBay seller to send you just the memory chip, or maybe a dump if they can do that for you (assuming your SPI chip is OK).
BTW, if you manage to obtain a dump, I would be interested in having it...

<Edit> You can use a chip from a different manufacturer, and most probably even a larger memory size - at least you could with the #3. Beware of the physical measurements of the chip - there are two VERY SIMILAR sizes - I forget what they are called, but if you get the wrong size, it won't fit and you'll have to fudge it...
Isoprop is offline Find More Posts by Isoprop
Last edited by Isoprop; May 15, 2011 at 04:19 PM.
Old May 15, 2011, 05:48 PM
Registered User
Giorg's Avatar
Italia, Lombardia, Milano
Joined May 2011
38 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by jims123 View Post
Giorg,
Wow, gutsy move.. I would never try to de-solder anything but the battery, even then would cut and splice the two leads rather than try to de-solder any components on here.. MUCH less try to read what was in the flash chip.. what did you hope to find in it that is not already in the .bin file?.. I don't believe you damaged it with 5.o vdc but likely erased it.. how did you set up the clock and control pins to actually read the serial data.. i think By far the best bet is to send it back to your vendor if you want one of these cams replaced (cause they will simply toss it.. ) because aside from possibly swapping the battery or adjusting focus it's nearly impossible to do so.. the 25Q16 is one of the simpler chips.. but setting up all the conditions it needs would be a challenge and then what have you got when you succeed in reading it? binary gibberish.. What clock speed did you use to clock the data out?

http://www.alldatasheet.net/datashee...Q16-100GI.html
The idea was to dump the memory of a good chip and write it on the bricked one. From what I learned SPI chip don't need external clock speed and the interface are usually simple.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Isoprop View Post
Yes. It's the same type as used in the #3, and it's easy to read/write if you have the proper programmer. You don't need any knowledge of the timing because the programmer does it all for you. You may need some grabbers or even a conversion socket if you do this more often.

Do an ebay search for "Nano Programmer" and you'll find what you need for $20 including shipping. Be warned that the software is good, but it pays havoc with your antivirus software (you have to disable the antivirus software). I used an old, dedicated PC for this. You also need a built-in Parallel port - not a USB conversion gizmo.

You can refer to an article I wrote about this programmer here. Don't worry, the article uses a GumPack, but the same method applies to the keychain. Ignore the first part because you have already done that. The wiring diagram using the external wiring adapter is much easier than connecting the dedicated socket, but note that you must bridge VCC and HOLD# (this was bridged internally on the #3). I just connected a grabber to both pin #7 and #8 (VCC and HOLD#). Also, use as short a cable as possible - this is not noted in the article.

Since you can apparently solder, maybe you could ask the eBay seller to send you just the memory chip, or maybe a dump if they can do that for you (assuming your SPI chip is OK).
BTW, if you manage to obtain a dump, I would be interested in having it...

<Edit> You can use a chip from a different manufacturer, and most probably even a larger memory size - at least you could with the #3. Beware of the physical measurements of the chip - there are two VERY SIMILAR sizes - I forget what they are called, but if you get the wrong size, it won't fit and you'll have to fudge it...
I'm also using an old laptop with all kind of connectivity. I've tried Ponyprog with the standard SPI interface listed on the site but then I discovered that this particular chip is not supported by the program but some very similar other are.

I've soldered the chip on a breakout board to ensure perfect electrical connectivity.

I'll read your site and experiment a little bit more to find the right interface since the first try was not successful and I still don't know if it's due to the interface or the overvolting.

The package is 8-SOIC ..small but not damn small http://search.digikey.com/scripts/Dk...25Q16BVSSIG-ND

I'm also in contact with a seller to get a replacement chip, but the diy way is more fascinating.

I'll hope to share the resulting dump with you all
Giorg is offline Find More Posts by Giorg
Last edited by Giorg; May 15, 2011 at 05:53 PM.
Old May 15, 2011, 06:00 PM
Just thumbing through...
victapilot's Avatar
United States, SC, Simpsonville
Joined Feb 2009
4,429 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by RogerDH View Post
Your enlarged view has been "resampled" after enlargement to smooth out the pixelated (jagged) edges. The enlarged view I posted was just a straight pixel enlargement with no smoothing, so you can see what's happening with individual pixels.
That's true, I cropped out a small section and resized. The resampling is automatic in Paint, and has 4 options : Best Quality, Bicubic, Bilinear, Nearest Neighbor. Best Quality is default, that's what was used.

When I zoom in on the original BMP frame grab however, I don't see the black line that you attribute to sharpening.
victapilot is offline Find More Posts by victapilot
Old May 15, 2011, 06:35 PM
Registered User
Joined Feb 2011
246 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by victapilot View Post
When I zoom in on the original BMP frame grab however, I don't see the black line that you attribute to sharpening.
It isn't really a black line; it's just a slightly darker edge a couple pixels wide where it meets the white edge. If you compare it to the one that hasn't been sharpened, the color on that one is fairly uniform up to the white edge.

Boo, it rained all day yesterday and today...
RogerDH is offline Find More Posts by RogerDH
Old May 15, 2011, 07:06 PM
Dance the skies...
Tom Frank's Avatar
United States, MA, Walpole
Joined Dec 2003
17,731 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by RogerDH View Post
Your 10 Mbps version was definitely sharper than your 7 Mbps, which is something I just wasn't seeing with my tests, so I tried it the same way you were doing it: I used a card that will shoot at 10 Mbps first, then go to 7 Mbps after going to photo mode and shooting a jpg. (My cards have that same behavior if I format 4096-byte units with Win7.) Doing it that way instead of using different cards, I got the same results you did: The first video is sharper than the second. I've been experimenting trying to figure out why, and I've determined that the same thing happens if I use a card that always shoots at 7 Mbps: If I shoot a video, shoot a still, and shoot another video, then even though both videos are 7 Mbps, the first is sharper than the second. Also, in enlarged views, it appears to be the same thing going on that I noticed with your videos: The first video has more digital sharpening applied. This doesn't happen, however, if I just shoot consecutive videos; it only happens if I go to still photo mode and back.

So, my theory is that going to photo mode sets some different parameters for the digital sharpening algorithm (presumably values better suited to the interpolated images), but going back to video mode doesn't reset those parameters.
I just duplicated your tests and got the same results and agree with your diagnosis on why this occurs. When dropping back to 7K data rate AFTER first taking a photo, the sharpness degrades visibly AND EQUALLY, whether you start from a 10K video setting or a 7K video setting. But I also then compared frames from going straight to 10K and going straight to 7K without going through the intermediate still picture process, and I can see NO VISIBLE DIFFERENCE in the images! I only used I-frames for the comparisons.

So here are my conclusions:
  • If you first take a still photo and then toggle the camera to take a video without shutting off your camera first, your video will be very visibly degraded! This is true whether your camera defaults to shooting 10K kbps or 7K kbps data rates!

  • There is no discernable difference during playback of a video shot at 10K kbps vs 7K kbps data rate.

  • If your flash cards force the camera to shoot at the higher 10K kbps data rate, the only way to the 7K kbps data rate without having visible video degradation is to use flash cards with formatting that forces the camera to default to the lower rate. The SDformatter utility seems to do this to most flash cards.

p.s. sorry, the lighting wasn't very good today for super sharp video, but I think viewing the photos side by side in full size still supports my conclusions.
Tom Frank is offline Find More Posts by Tom Frank
Last edited by Tom Frank; May 15, 2011 at 07:36 PM. Reason: added pics
Old May 15, 2011, 09:25 PM
Registered User
Joined Feb 2011
246 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Frank View Post
p.s. sorry, the lighting wasn't very good today for super sharp video, but I think viewing the photos side by side in full size still supports my conclusions.
I haven't played with 3D movies very much in Magix yet -- the documentation isn't very extensive and I didn't get very far when I first looked at it -- but to give you some idea of what a red-cyan anaglyph video would look like (i.e. with the glasses that come with Magix now), here's a StereoPhoto Maker anaglyph of two of your frames, apparently taken a few inches apart:



You lose a lot of sharpness and detail in anaglyphs, so my favorite way of viewing 3D is "freeviewing" (eyeballs only) reversed stereo pairs (a "crossview" pair). Since the pair is reversed, you view it by converging your eyes at a point somewhere between you and the display, at which point the pair overlap and "fuse" into a 3D view. "Parallel" (i.e. like the antique stereograph cards) freeviewing is also possible, but the center of the pairs can't be much wider than the distance between your eyes because diverging really hurts. But with a little practice, you can crossview pairs that take up the full width of a monitor:



BTW, here's a trick someone may want to try with Magix's 3D capability: If you shoot straight out to the side of a moving vehicle, you can make a 3D video with a single camera! You just use the same video for both left and right views, but offset the tracks by one or more frames. This might work well with aerial shots from under the wing, because you can increase the effective steroscopic separation (and perceived depth of the landscape) by just offsetting the tracks more.
RogerDH is offline Find More Posts by RogerDH
Old May 15, 2011, 09:40 PM
Curiouser and curiouser
Kokopeli's Avatar
Rochester, NY, USA
Joined Oct 2005
2,062 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by RogerDH View Post
...........
BTW, here's a trick someone may want to try with Magix's 3D capability: If you shoot straight out to the side of a moving vehicle, you can make a 3D video with a single camera! You just use the same video for both left and right views, but offset the tracks by one or more frames. This might work well with aerial shots from under the wing, because you can increase the effective steroscopic separation (and perceived depth of the landscape) by just offsetting the tracks more.
That works!
I have done it from the window of an airliner.
That was years ago.
I never thought of doing it with my foamy.
BTW, the stereo photog nuts call that technique HYPERSTEREO because the distance between frame is lots larger than the distance between your eyes.

Walt
Kokopeli is offline Find More Posts by Kokopeli
Old May 15, 2011, 09:43 PM
Registered User
Joined Feb 2011
246 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by wjbite View Post
That works!
I have done it from the window of an airliner.
That was years ago.
I never thought of doing it with my foamy.
BTW, the stereo photog nuts call that technique HYPERSTEREO because the distance between frame is lots larger than the distance between your eyes.

Walt
Yes, and I think hyper is what you'll want to see much depth in the landscape.
RogerDH is offline Find More Posts by RogerDH
Old May 15, 2011, 09:53 PM
Dance the skies...
Tom Frank's Avatar
United States, MA, Walpole
Joined Dec 2003
17,731 Posts
Roger, thanks for the 3D experimenting with the pics I posted. I tried both ways of viewing (I had forgotten MAGIX had the colored glasses in the box) and both ways look very nice! I couldn't have planned the positioning any better! I've practiced the "freeview" method on other stereo pairs, and on these two images, what works for me is to position my head about 12-14 in. from the monitor then starting to look cross-eyed to trigger the merging of the pairs. Once the two images "lock" together, I can relax my eyes and view somewhat normally.

Also, I had never thought of making a stereo pair by sideways shooting, but it makes perfect sense, and for AV, you really do need the time lapse between frames to generate any stereo effect for distant objects. Very cool!

I'll have to try the side view stereo movie capability of MAGIX... thanks for the inspiration!

Quote:
Originally Posted by RogerDH View Post
I haven't played with 3D movies very much in Magix yet -- the documentation isn't very extensive and I didn't get very far when I first looked at it -- but to give you some idea of what a red-cyan anaglyph video would look like (i.e. with the glasses that come with Magix now), here's a StereoPhoto Maker anaglyph of two of your frames, apparently taken a few inches apart:



You lose a lot of sharpness and detail in anaglyphs, so my favorite way of viewing 3D is "freeviewing" (eyeballs only) reversed stereo pairs (a "crossview" pair). Since the pair is reversed, you view it by converging your eyes at a point somewhere between you and the display, at which point the pair overlap and "fuse" into a 3D view. "Parallel" (i.e. like the antique stereograph cards) freeviewing is also possible, but the center of the pairs can't be much wider than the distance between your eyes because diverging really hurts. But with a little practice, you can crossview pairs that take up the full width of a monitor:



BTW, here's a trick someone may want to try with Magix's 3D capability: If you shoot straight out to the side of a moving vehicle, you can make a 3D video with a single camera! You just use the same video for both left and right views, but offset the tracks by one or more frames. This might work well with aerial shots from under the wing, because you can increase the effective steroscopic separation (and perceived depth of the landscape) by just offsetting the tracks more.
Tom Frank is offline Find More Posts by Tom Frank
Last edited by Tom Frank; May 15, 2011 at 10:05 PM.
Old May 15, 2011, 10:19 PM
Registered User
Joined Feb 2011
246 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Frank View Post
I'll have to try the side view stereo movie capability of MAGIX... thanks for the inspiration!
Where I got stuck in Magix was trying to figure out how the auto alignment thing worked -- my videos might have just been too badly aligned to start with -- but one advantage of this single-camera trick is that alignment is not an issue.
RogerDH is offline Find More Posts by RogerDH
Old May 15, 2011, 11:08 PM
eat, sleep, FLY FLY FLY
Mr.frankenjet's Avatar
Charlottesville, VA
Joined Jun 2005
1,069 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by jims123 View Post
Looks great.. I though it was a rubber band plane for a while tho.. with a BIG pink prop .. but turned out, that wasn't the pointy end after all Nice takeoff's and landings!
Thanks, it does have the wind up look but flies real slow, good platform if it's calm.

empeabee, no grabbers yet but there has to be zero wind before I put her up above the tree line

Hope to play with the lens next, thanks everbody, RIP 5 in 1
Mr.frankenjet is offline Find More Posts by Mr.frankenjet
Old May 15, 2011, 11:19 PM
Registered User
jims123's Avatar
USA, CA, San Diego 92120
Joined Oct 2007
3,088 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Giorg View Post
The idea was to dump the memory of a good chip and write it on the bricked one. From what I learned SPI chip don't need external clock speed and the interface are usually simple.

I'm also in contact with a seller to get a replacement chip, but the diy way is more fascinating.

I'll hope to share the resulting dump with you all
Sounds good.. have fun.. "simple" is a relative term.... writing a .bin file to the root of the drive would be the simple approach .. but you can't see the folder any longer, and if you can get the seller to send a replacement before you send back the defective one .. why not.. the problem i see is if you extract any data that's not in exactly the same format as that .BIN file (Checksums and all) it's not going to load anyway is it? I hope you don't wind up bricking both.. and yes , you do need the clock and special programmer and all the rest of the clips and things ISO passed . If you get a flash chip from your vendor instead, (as the FAQ alludes might be possible, I'd ask for one that's pre-programmed to have a better chance of actually restoring the cam. .. but I also understand they want to do some post analysis to see what's behind the problem.. Likely too late for that now.. but think of all you will learn along the way.. Good Luck.. JimS
jims123 is offline Find More Posts by jims123
Last edited by jims123; May 15, 2011 at 11:51 PM.
Old May 15, 2011, 11:47 PM
Registered User
jims123's Avatar
USA, CA, San Diego 92120
Joined Oct 2007
3,088 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by wjbite View Post
whoops!
Shoulda known it - Tom has already answered my question
In post #3 there are links to post #508 and #587 that tells it all. LOL
He also discourages changing the focus unless it is proven that it is needed.
I guess I will take some snapshots and check it out.

Walt
Tom,
did you ever try to determine if you can optimize the focus for things about two to three feet away on a bench.. I've tried to search all the topics and FAQ's, see a reference to 8 to 10' as a "close in' reference but I'm wondering if you can optimize one of these for MACRO .. or even how to videos on the bench?
jims123 is offline Find More Posts by jims123
Old May 16, 2011, 06:04 AM
Just thumbing through...
victapilot's Avatar
United States, SC, Simpsonville
Joined Feb 2009
4,429 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by RogerDH View Post
[IMG] BTW, here's a trick someone may want to try with Magix's 3D capability: If you shoot straight out to the side of a moving vehicle, you can make a 3D video with a single camera!
By uploading the stereo pair to Youtube with the code yt3d:enable=true in the tag line, Youtube will enable analglyphic or other modes of viewing that are selectable.

There are lots of good examples out there, I have a few but like some of the Japanese work
victapilot is offline Find More Posts by victapilot
Old May 16, 2011, 07:56 AM
Registered User
Joined Nov 2010
2,546 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Giorg View Post
The idea was to dump the memory of a good chip and write it on the bricked one. From what I learned SPI chip don't need external clock speed and the interface are usually simple.

I'm also using an old laptop with all kind of connectivity. I've tried Ponyprog with the standard SPI interface listed on the site but then I discovered that this particular chip is not supported by the program but some very similar other are.

I've soldered the chip on a breakout board to ensure perfect electrical connectivity.

I'll read your site and experiment a little bit more to find the right interface since the first try was not successful and I still don't know if it's due to the interface or the overvolting.

The package is 8-SOIC ..small but not damn small http://search.digikey.com/scripts/Dk...25Q16BVSSIG-ND

I'm also in contact with a seller to get a replacement chip, but the diy way is more fascinating.

I'll hope to share the resulting dump with you all
It's very likely that you were lucky with the 5V. These chips are pretty tough. I remember someone else doing the same thing, but the chip was OK.

Some of those 8-SOIC packages are a little wider than the others. I had to buy a second ZIF-socket (maybe they are called differently these days), because the chip didn't fit into the first socket I bought. The size difference is minimal.

An old notebook, as long as it has a parallel port, is ideal for these kinds of things. If you go for the Nano Programmer, the seller is most helpful should you require aid.

Just a warning. I destroyed a #3 by burning invalid data into the chip. I believe that my hacked "code" resulted in something being programatically shorted. I then replaced the chip with a valid chip from an identical camera, but it wouldn't come back to life. Anyway, as long as you don't hack the binary code like I did, you should be OK.

I ended up desoldering the 100+ pin processor in order to test my desoldering skills. Surprisingly, I managed quite well, but sodering it back in place was not an easy task for me. I wouldn't want to do it on a real board.

I agree that DIY is much more fun than having it done for you so I hope this works out OK. If I had a camera to spare I would have dumped my chip for you.
Isoprop is offline Find More Posts by Isoprop
Old May 16, 2011, 08:21 AM
Registered User
Joined Nov 2010
2,546 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by wfvn View Post
Hi all,

I'm still having problems with powering my camera while recording.

I've read the startpost, I've read the post about the special cable but still don't think that's all there is to it.

I own 2 of the single AA power devices. These have worked for me 100% of the time. Just plug in the camera, power it up and you can start recording while connected to the single AA power device.

However, I've got 2 differend solar power devices also. The package contained a USB cable (one with mini-usb which goes into the solar power device and also a normal USB cable, both whith a bunch of connectors for different kinds of mobile phones but also both with a mini USB connector)

This evening I was trying the powering again and with 1 mini USB plug connected to one other mini USB cable, provided with one of my solar chargers, I could power my camera and then start recording (just like the single AA power device).
Also I have 4 short USB to mini USB cables. Just one of them also worked.

But for some reson after some testing with different cables and with different combinations of power devices, cables and cables with attachable plugs, my camera refused to power up again, also after 5 minutes so I gave it a reset (reset button).

Now I just can't get the previously working cables to work again

BTW: I opened one of the working connectors. In the connector is a red cable to pin1 of the mini-usb. A black cable is connected to pin 5 and also to a 320k resistor (orange/red/yellow/gold bands) which is connected to pin 4 (aka pin x).

Why on earth is a cable sometimes working and sometimes not?
The special cable is what it is, and it works, that's all there is to it

Which cable had a resistor between pin 4 and 5? Not a #11 supplied cable I hope.

You should only use standard cables with this camera, or the special cable if you want continuous recording.

I don't know why your cables that previously worked no longer work. You may have a similar problem that I had where the power switch was making intermittent contact with a nearby resistor. See post #1799

Also, a lot of those cheap USB cables are not reliable. I have thrown out many.
Isoprop is offline Find More Posts by Isoprop
Old May 16, 2011, 08:36 AM
Registered User
willy163's Avatar
Italia, Piemonte, Strambino
Joined Feb 2010
179 Posts
My 3D experience

Quote:
Originally Posted by victapilot View Post
By uploading the stereo pair to Youtube with the code yt3d:enable=true in the tag line, Youtube will enable analglyphic or other modes of viewing that are selectable.

There are lots of good examples out there, I have a few but like some of the Japanese work
Hi everybody.

I'd like to share my (bad) experience with 3D shootings.
I began at end of '80 with a 35mm single lens reflex.
I used to take two pictures (slides) moving camera between the shots.
3D effect depends by lens lenght:
-wide lens = less objects distance in the 3rd dimension ("lighter 3D effect")
-tele lens = heavier 3d effect
Furthermore, 3d effect depends also by distance between two shots (and is more controllable):
-little distance between two shots = lighter 3D effect
-big distance between two shots = heavier 3D effect

I took very intresting still life pictures with a satisfying 3D effect.

With this background, a couple of years ago I've tried a 3D video from my rc plane.
Problem was how to combine two videos.
As you said... Youtube!

I've mounted two #3 type cameras on wings tips (as far as I can to obtain a good 3D effect).
After start recording, I did some "jump" with the ribbon attached to my TX to sync and align two recordings in post-production.
Then I've found a better method: I clap my hands two times and sync videos with that noise.

Ok... let's fly.

Result was disastrous!!!
My problems:
1) very bad wether for this experiment (but I were VERY curious for the result)
2) wings of my plane flex under load and one video rotate relatively to other one
3) memories were slow writing. So, after less than one minute, videos went out of sync
4) objects are too far while flying. 3D video and non-3D video aren't so different. I think it should be impressive if taken by an RC car.
After this, I've dropped my research on 3D videos.
Video is still on Youtube. But it is private because it is very bad

Willy.

PS.: sorry for my poor English: I'm Italian.
willy163 is offline Find More Posts by willy163
Old May 16, 2011, 08:44 AM
Jack
USA, ME, Ellsworth
Joined May 2008
17,001 Posts
The mini-USB connectors have 5th pin on them that can be used to identify that the cable being used is "approved" by the device the cable is used with. It is done by connecting a resistance across the "x" conductor and the Gnd or ground pin. The other conductors are called 1, 2, 3, and 4 and "x" is physically located between 3 and 4.

The device checks for the value of the resistance and if it is not right it assumes the wrong cable (and whatever is on the end of the cable, like a charger) is being used and it will not acknowledge the connection.

The "x" lead resistor has been used by cell phones, GPS receivers, and other devices to ensure that only the supplied chargers were used. To consumers it often appeared to be nothing more than a merchandising scheme to ensure that only the branded and over-priced chargers were used.

As long a a resistance of the correct value was used (added to the cable), any charger of the right voltage could be made to work in all the cases I have heard of.

Jack
jackerbes is offline Find More Posts by jackerbes
Old May 16, 2011, 08:59 AM
Registered User
jims123's Avatar
USA, CA, San Diego 92120
Joined Oct 2007
3,088 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Isoprop View Post
It's very likely that you were lucky with the 5V. These chips are pretty tough. I remember someone else doing the same thing, but the chip was OK.
..
Iso,
have you ever tried to restore a bricked No 11 thru chip level replacement surgery and re-programming the flash chip.. and succeed? Just curious
jims123 is offline Find More Posts by jims123
Old May 16, 2011, 09:08 AM
Registered User
United States, CA, San Ramon
Joined Apr 2011
96 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by jackerbes View Post
The mini-USB connectors have 5th pin on them that can be used to identify that the cable being used is "approved" by the device the cable is used with. It is done by connecting a resistance across the "x" conductor and the Gnd or ground pin. The other conductors are called 1, 2, 3, and 4 and "x" is physically located between 3 and 4.

The device checks for the value of the resistance and if it is not right it assumes the wrong cable (and whatever is on the end of the cable, like a charger) is being used and it will not acknowledge the connection.

The "x" lead resistor has been used by cell phones, GPS receivers, and other devices to ensure that only the supplied chargers were used. To consumers it often appeared to be nothing more than a merchandising scheme to ensure that only the branded and over-priced chargers were used.

As long a a resistance of the correct value was used (added to the cable), any charger of the right voltage could be made to work in all the cases I have heard of.

Jack
While some (all?) Apple devices use it this way to force you to buy their approved chargers, this is not part of the USB standard. The extra pin is there to switch the device into "On-the-Go" mode. I have a pda that does this and it is great. I can plug mice, keyboards, flash drives, or anything else into it with the special "On-the-Go" cable. Not sure what all this has to do with the #11 camera, but as far as I know, what you stated is not what that extra pin was for.
xamindar is offline Find More Posts by xamindar
Old May 16, 2011, 09:19 AM
Registered User
Joined Nov 2010
2,546 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by jackerbes View Post
The mini-USB connectors have 5th pin on them that can be used to identify that the cable being used is "approved" by the device the cable is used with. It is done by connecting a resistance across the "x" conductor and the Gnd or ground pin. The other conductors are called 1, 2, 3, and 4 and "x" is physically located between 3 and 4.

The device checks for the value of the resistance and if it is not right it assumes the wrong cable (and whatever is on the end of the cable, like a charger) is being used and it will not acknowledge the connection.

The "x" lead resistor has been used by cell phones, GPS receivers, and other devices to ensure that only the supplied chargers were used. To consumers it often appeared to be nothing more than a merchandising scheme to ensure that only the branded and over-priced chargers were used.

As long a a resistance of the correct value was used (added to the cable), any charger of the right voltage could be made to work in all the cases I have heard of.

Jack
Pin x, or for the #11 pin #4, is used by the #11 for continuous recording. It must NOT be shorted to earth. For a standard USB cable, pin #4 (pin x) is not connected. For a #11 special cable, pin #4 (pin x) is +5V and pin #1 is not connected.

While some devices use pin #4 (pin x) to identify the cable, it is not, and must not be used as such for the #11.
Isoprop is offline Find More Posts by Isoprop
Old May 16, 2011, 09:20 AM
Registered User
Joined Apr 2011
14 Posts
hi all,

give me please a ebay link to a #11 cam + the special cable. i only need this two things. another #11 cam and a special cable. also i see you are in 3d. i did get good results with two #11 cams making stereo movies. giving you soon more infos.
Karkadam is offline Find More Posts by Karkadam
Old May 16, 2011, 09:25 AM
Registered User
Joined Nov 2010
2,546 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by jims123 View Post
Iso,
have you ever tried to restore a bricked No 11 thru chip level replacement surgery and re-programming the flash chip.. and succeed? Just curious
No, but I see no reason why it should not work. I did this a few times with the #3, which uses the same/similar chip. Also, if I remember correctly, the seller of Tom's first camera also offered to send him just the chip.
Isoprop is offline Find More Posts by Isoprop
Old May 16, 2011, 09:29 AM
Curiouser and curiouser
Kokopeli's Avatar
Rochester, NY, USA
Joined Oct 2005
2,062 Posts
4 Gig vs. 8 Gig card limits?

I bought the camera with an 8 Gig card.
The 4 Gig recording limit that has been mentioned here raises a question for me.
Is the 4 Gig limit a hard border in the middle of the card or is it just a file size limit that will fit anywhere on the card?
Maybe I should state my question better.
Consider a scenario where I have 3 Gig of files on the card and start a new video - will the recording stop after one Gig when it hits the middle of the drive or will it be able to record for the whole 4 Gig limit?

Thanks,
Walt
Kokopeli is offline Find More Posts by Kokopeli
Old May 16, 2011, 09:40 AM
Registered User
bobflyman's Avatar
Southwest England
Joined Nov 2010
330 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by air_crash View Post
Personally I was looking at an inexpensive solution. Else I would have gone for the $53 camera - power pack/charger combo.
So I have made a 4AA and a 4AAA pack but I also have in the way two inexpensive emergency USB charger.
It is cheap, lightweight and with a small size.

Once they arrive I`ll see if they have a good voltage regulation on rechargeable batteries. I hope they are not designed to run only with alkaline batteries.

I have read Isoprop`s valuable info but I will not use the charger to power the camera while shooting.
I will only use it to charge it.
Two cameras, one will be charging, the other recording.
So no cables and battery to a small RC heli/plane/other.

If this charger makes it then it will be the best I think. Price, weight and size is the key. Along with the need of only two rechargeable AA batteries.
Just thought I'd report on my test using one of these Emergency USB chargers to back up power while continuous recording.
http://cgi.ebay.com/Emergency-USB-Ch...item35b18b1832

For some reason the supplier linked doesn't post to the UK, but I found one that does, though it was a couple of dollars more. 3.28 inc postage. What a great little bit of kit. I'm amazed they can get an 'upto 500mA' 5v output from 2 x 1.2 (ish) volts rechargeables I must say!

I adapted the 'special' mini usb lead with the 5 and 4 pin connection (cut from the car lead) that I use with my external NiCad pack so I now have the choice of two power supply packs now. I used two 1900 mA Sanyo Eneloop AA batteries in the USB charger.
I cut up a 'normal' usb and used the pc end +5v and 0 and soldered to one of those little red connectors so that I can still use my NiCad pack too. The standard mini usb had 4 wires, but the 'special' number 4 wire wasn't there or I could have just switched connections and re soldered that.

Anyhow with a fully charged camera and two fully charged Eneloops I just got 2 and a half hours recording. The cam saved a file at 4 gig (1 hr 20 mins) and then continued recording for another 3.4 gig (1hr 10 mins). Pretty impressive.
The camera battery was still fully charged at the end of the test? And the usb battery pack still had enough power to light the charge light on the camera if I plugged in a standard usb cable. I'm not really sure why an 8 gig card stopped at 7.39 gig? Useful bit of kit anyway.

PS For some odd reason the clips had no audio track at all? Though when I stopped it test if it had recorded and then recorded a a couple of mins more, the sound had returned? Very odd. It wasn't a silent audio track, it just shows on VLC as having no audio track so I don't think it's something like a bad connection on the mike. Must have been something to do with the way it booted up in the first place. Anybody else had similar problems?
bobflyman is offline Find More Posts by bobflyman
Last edited by bobflyman; May 16, 2011 at 09:56 AM.
Old May 16, 2011, 09:41 AM
Registered User
United States, CA, San Ramon
Joined Apr 2011
96 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by wjbite View Post
I bought the camera with an 8 Gig card.
The 4 Gig recording limit that has been mentioned here raises a question for me.
Is the 4 Gig limit a hard border in the middle of the card or is it just a file size limit that will fit anywhere on the card?
Maybe I should state my question better.
Consider a scenario where I have 3 Gig of files on the card and start a new video - will the recording stop after one Gig when it hits the middle of the drive or will it be able to record for the whole 4 Gig limit?

Thanks,
Walt
4Gb is the largest file size you can put on a fat32 filesystem. Look up fat32 on wikipedia and read about it there.
xamindar is offline Find More Posts by xamindar
Old May 16, 2011, 09:48 AM
Curiouser and curiouser
Kokopeli's Avatar
Rochester, NY, USA
Joined Oct 2005
2,062 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by xamindar View Post
4Gb is the largest file size you can put on a fat32 filesystem. Look up fat32 on wikipedia and read about it there.
Thanks - so it is just an issue about the number of bits in the address.
No problem, then.

Walt
Kokopeli is offline Find More Posts by Kokopeli
Old May 16, 2011, 09:53 AM
Registered User
United States, CA, San Ramon
Joined Apr 2011
96 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by wjbite View Post
Thanks - so it is just an issue about the number of bits in the address.
No problem, then.

Walt
Yeah, to answer your question more specifically, the video file will (can) still get to a 4GB size.
xamindar is offline Find More Posts by xamindar
Old May 16, 2011, 10:24 AM
Dance the skies...
Tom Frank's Avatar
United States, MA, Walpole
Joined Dec 2003
17,731 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by jims123 View Post
Tom,
did you ever try to determine if you can optimize the focus for things about two to three feet away on a bench.. I've tried to search all the topics and FAQ's, see a reference to 8 to 10' as a "close in' reference but I'm wondering if you can optimize one of these for MACRO .. or even how to videos on the bench?
I have not tried to optimize for closer in work, but theoretically, it should be possible by turning the lens very slightly (about one notch or less on the lens housing) counter-clockwise. I did get some focus charts and info on how to place them to focus the camera, but I didn't end up using them because they are placed about 5 feet from the camera, and I was wanting to get best distant focus. After now using purely video samples to arrive at my current focus for best distance and seeing how well it still focuses close in, I'm not so sure the wall chart method won't also give good distant focus as well.

The chart from the sensor manufacturer and the wall orientation for using them are attached if any one wants to try this method. The orientation of 5 of the charts on a wall for bench focusing is show in one pic. For this to work well, the camera lens needs to be at the same level and perpendicular to the center chart (star) on the wall. The four outlying charts should be arranged so that they are just barely visible in the four corners of the cameras video. The camera lens also needs to be kept parallel to the wall while focusing... much easier said than done.
Tom Frank is offline Find More Posts by Tom Frank
Last edited by Tom Frank; May 16, 2011 at 10:32 AM.
Old May 16, 2011, 10:34 AM
Dance the skies...
Tom Frank's Avatar
United States, MA, Walpole
Joined Dec 2003
17,731 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by victapilot View Post
By uploading the stereo pair to Youtube with the code yt3d:enable=true in the tag line, Youtube will enable analglyphic or other modes of viewing that are selectable.

There are lots of good examples out there, I have a few but like some of the Japanese work
Is this just for still images? I think MAGIX can do it with entire videos.
Tom Frank is offline Find More Posts by Tom Frank
Old May 16, 2011, 10:43 AM
Dance the skies...
Tom Frank's Avatar
United States, MA, Walpole
Joined Dec 2003
17,731 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by jackerbes View Post
The mini-USB connectors have 5th pin on them that can be used to identify that the cable being used is "approved" by the device the cable is used with. It is done by connecting a resistance across the "x" conductor and the Gnd or ground pin. The other conductors are called 1, 2, 3, and 4 and "x" is physically located between 3 and 4.

The device checks for the value of the resistance and if it is not right it assumes the wrong cable (and whatever is on the end of the cable, like a charger) is being used and it will not acknowledge the connection.

The "x" lead resistor has been used by cell phones, GPS receivers, and other devices to ensure that only the supplied chargers were used. To consumers it often appeared to be nothing more than a merchandising scheme to ensure that only the branded and over-priced chargers were used.

As long a a resistance of the correct value was used (added to the cable), any charger of the right voltage could be made to work in all the cases I have heard of.

Jack
My JAZZ HDV178 has a charger cable like that. I have accidentally connected it to my #11 with no ill effects. The #11 is set up to accept +5V on pin X, so it just ignores the resistor to ground when +5V is on the normal Pin 1.
Tom Frank is offline Find More Posts by Tom Frank
Old May 16, 2011, 10:54 AM
Dance the skies...
Tom Frank's Avatar
United States, MA, Walpole
Joined Dec 2003
17,731 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by willy163 View Post
Hi everybody.

I'd like to share my (bad) experience with 3D shootings.
...
I've mounted two #3 type cameras on wings tips (as far as I can to obtain a good 3D effect).
...
Result was disastrous!!!
My problems:
1) very bad wether for this experiment (but I were VERY curious for the result)
2) wings of my plane flex under load and one video rotate relatively to other one
3) memories were slow writing. So, after less than one minute, videos went out of sync
4) objects are too far while flying. 3D video and non-3D video aren't so different. I think it should be impressive if taken by an RC car.
After this, I've dropped my research on 3D videos.
Video is still on Youtube. But it is private because it is very bad

Willy.

PS.: sorry for my poor English: I'm Italian.
Thanks for the insights, Willy. I had done some ground testing with similar wingtip idea using two #3 cameras and found it virtually impossible to repeatably mount the cameras with their fields of view properly aligned, and then with the #3 dropping some frames randomly, the videos got out of sync. Now that there is a tool (808repair.exe) that can scan the #3 videos and morph in dropped frames based on the ones before and after, the sync problem should be solvable, and the #11 would not have it to begin with with no dropped frames. But the alignment issue is still there. I think it's necessary to have a rigid "stick" that is attacked to the plane with cameras somewhat permanently fixed in proper alignment on the stick for this to be easily repeatable, and then, as you say, the 3D effect will only become apparent on closer in portions of the flight, like take off, landing, low passes, etc.

p.s. Your English is fine... better than some who live here!
Tom Frank is offline Find More Posts by Tom Frank
Old May 16, 2011, 10:57 AM
Dance the skies...
Tom Frank's Avatar
United States, MA, Walpole
Joined Dec 2003
17,731 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Karkadam View Post
hi all,

give me please a ebay link to a #11 cam + the special cable. i only need this two things. another #11 cam and a special cable. also i see you are in 3d. i did get good results with two #11 cams making stereo movies. giving you soon more infos.
Please see post #2 for ebay sellers.
Tom Frank is offline Find More Posts by Tom Frank
Old May 16, 2011, 11:00 AM
Dance the skies...
Tom Frank's Avatar
United States, MA, Walpole
Joined Dec 2003
17,731 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by wjbite View Post
I bought the camera with an 8 Gig card.
The 4 Gig recording limit that has been mentioned here raises a question for me.
Is the 4 Gig limit a hard border in the middle of the card or is it just a file size limit that will fit anywhere on the card?
Maybe I should state my question better.
Consider a scenario where I have 3 Gig of files on the card and start a new video - will the recording stop after one Gig when it hits the middle of the drive or will it be able to record for the whole 4 Gig limit?

Thanks,
Walt
It will record until the card is full. The 4GB limit is imposed by the FAT32 file system, and the camera simply stops, saves the file, and continues on when it hits that limit.

P.S. This, too , is in the FAQS on post #3.
Tom Frank is offline Find More Posts by Tom Frank
Old May 16, 2011, 11:02 AM
Registered User
jims123's Avatar
USA, CA, San Diego 92120
Joined Oct 2007
3,088 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Frank View Post
I have not tried to optimize for closer in work, but theoretically, it should be possible by turning the lens very slightly (about one notch or less on the lens housing) counter-clockwise. ... much easier said than done.
Tom
thanks a lot, .. I'll try to get motivated to try optimize one for How-To's but would like to be more sure of something.. the distances on the chart would suggest it's possible, but how big is this chart? are you supposed to just print it on 8.5 by 11 inch paper.. if the chart is that small I bet it would be a good challenge to focus on it.. do you know if this chart came from the sensor vendor alone, or perhaps as importantly, the maker of of the adjustable mount for the sensor with that particular No.11 sensor mounted in it? JimS
jims123 is offline Find More Posts by jims123
Old May 16, 2011, 11:05 AM
Registered User
Ελλάς, Αττική, Αθήνα
Joined Apr 2011
316 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobflyman View Post
Just thought I'd report on my test using one of these Emergency USB chargers to back up power while continuous recording.
http://cgi.ebay.com/Emergency-USB-Ch...item35b18b1832

What a great little bit of kit. I'm amazed they can get an 'upto 500mA' 5v output from 2 x 1.2 (ish) volts rechargeables I must say!

I adapted the 'special' mini usb lead with the 5 and 4 pin connection (cut from the car lead) that I use with my external NiCad pack so I now have the choice of two power supply packs now. I used two 1900 mA Sanyo Eneloop AA batteries in the USB charger.

The camera battery was still fully charged at the end of the test? And the usb battery pack still had enough power to light the charge light on the camera if I plugged in a standard usb cable. I'm not really sure why an 8 gig card stopped at 7.39 gig? Useful bit of kit anyway.

PS For some odd reason the clips had no audio track at all?
I bought two of those.
They are great indeed.

I`m using them to charge only, with a standard cable. Not for continuous recording.
I think that I had read about the voltage for continuous recording, it must be 4.2V (stabilized under load) and not 5V.
But it is not very clear which of the two or if both of them are good for continuous recording.

A 8GB miniSDHC card has actually less than 7.5GB available space.
Cause storage manufacturers tell the capacity to demical values but the (any) software tells the capacity to binary values.
So your card was pretty full recorded.
If you add wasted space, when you shoot many little videos, then you can end up with a filled card but only 7.2GB in video.
As if the cluster is 32KB and a video is 50KB then 64KB of the card will be occupied for only 50KB of video. Well, there is no video at 50KB but that was an example.

Just see the available size of the card, the used space and the free space by right clicking on the mass storage device and select properties, and then you can see the total size of the videos on disk and the total actual size of the videos if you select all videos (CTRL+A) and right click to select properties.

As for the audio problem I don`t know. See if it is related to the 4.2/5V thing.
air_crash is offline Find More Posts by air_crash
Closed Thread


Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Video Samurai with key cam AeroNut45 Electric Plane Talk 2 Oct 30, 2010 11:40 PM
Found found beladog FPV Equipment (FS/W) 1 Oct 30, 2010 01:01 PM
Discussion Any sign of True real time HD FPV gear....not secondary HD CAM ???!! khaled_abobakr FPV Talk 8 Oct 10, 2010 07:13 AM
Mini-Review Key Chain Cam for your autogyro!!! imsofaman Auto Gyros 7 Sep 10, 2010 07:10 AM