jjmav

Some of you have used Windows Movie Maker (WMM) to capture live feed video on your laptops or pc's. WMM has a small window when showing real time video. I want to get real time video on full screen, not just a fraction of my screen. Most programs seem to only be able to play back in full screen. Anyone know of software or ways to get full screen live feed? This is a great forum!

Rj-TailSpin

Most capture software will allow you to capture upto 800X(something, can't remember the number). The fact is... unless you have a REALLY powerful system... the computer/program will not be able to keep up resulting in lost frames i.e. blurring junk. Use the largest screen capture your computer allows and then when you dub, author, burn etc... the final cut after editing... use the largest format available which again doesn't drop frames. This is the only way I know of building a large screen production. I made an 800X600 AVI flying over a patriotic corn maze with pictures and Lee Greenwoods' "Proud to be an American" and it turned out to be over 140M. So big I can't even load it to the web for others to see! The only format which will support nice quality full screen movies is DVD. That's if your puter is plenty powerfully.

Rob

yb2normal

I think the limiting factor is the device you use to capture the video.

USB devices are comparatively slow and therefore would not produce a good looking large screen video. Firewire is a lot faster but I don't know of a device that will capture an analog video signal in real time and display it on your PC.

What ever you end up going with, it's worth considering a solution that writes directly to video memory... this will help minimize the impact of a slower CPU.

Regards,
Bill

jjmav

Thanks for your replies,

jjmav

Fubar-One

My Feedback: (1)

Guess I better forget about posting my latest mpg which came out to 313 megs! Actually, was just some software I was playing with that came with my new DVD burner. Old video that was remixed by the program to music. Kinda neat actually but WAY too large to put online. Maybe I can re-render it to a wmv or something...

lvspark

ATI all-in-wonder card works pretty good...

Rj-TailSpin

ATI All-In-Wonder is what I use. But, the problem with Ulead is they keep releasing new buggy software and require payment to upgrade. Very dirty business if you ask me.

When scaling the output size or window size, if you use a non-standard window... the file size grows like crazy. This will happen with any video editor program.

I wish somebody could come up with a formula/procedure for best PC quality. Each format, AVI, MPG, MOV and WMV have advantages and strengths. To go from raw composite to capture (VHS, S-VHS, or MiniDV), then import to the PC (all PCs handle video "differently" depending upon their hardware (OS, CPU, Memory, CACHE, attached devices, capture card, video board) and then to edit and the differences from one program to another, then to burn a specific format (AVI, MPG, MOV, DVD or WMV) for a specific use...

What I'm getting at is... this stuff is complicated and really time consuming!!! And, I didn't mention anything about the capture parameters of the headend composite recorder, the import stage, or the burn stage. There are so many combinations to be tested... I could devote 5 years doing so, Wait, in 2 years the technology completely changes!!! eRRRRRAAAURURUR!!!

Maybe the answer is to stop worrying and JUST DO IT! I am working with an ISP and perhaps size won't matter any more!!! Don't tell your wife this because it could ruin your christmas-LOL

Rob

DOH_Blk_Adder

depends on how beefy your PC is and what kind of video card and capture software for me and my apps i find that WinTv works just fine and i have a full screen none of that windows or realplayer nonsense

Fubar-One

My Feedback: (1)

I am in the process of upgrading my puter just for the video editing. Going for a athlon 2400+ cpu and new motherboard. Far from top of the line but sure will be faster than the 800mhz athlon system I now use. Max allowable RAM for my current board is 256 megs and its only pc100.
The new board will have 333FSB and up to two gigs of 333 DDR RAM. Will also be increasing from UDMA66 to UDMA133 so everything should be faster. Also picked up a DVD burner to use both for archiving my raw footage in AVI mode and buring my movies to DVD for viewing.
I burned a test disc the other day that had some 40 minutes of play time and I swear it took about 4 hours to render.
Also got a new webhost with 3 times the space and a much better streaming rate along with my own domain.
Wont tell what the domain is till I get the site up and going.'

When I win the Lotto I will get myself a HAL 9000...

DOH_Blk_Adder

your going to be hard pressed to beable to do much video work with that unit im sorry to say

Fubar-One

My Feedback: (1)

Compared to what I am using now I think it will be a large improvement.
2.5X the processor speed, 2gigs of RAM possible from 256megs max, going to a 4X AGP from a 1X, 333 FSB from 200, 333 DDR DIMM from PC100 DIMM, UDMA 133 from UDMA66, etc.
Motherboard and CPU cost $100 with shipping and tax.
Wont be no Ferrari, but much better than the Geo I am using now.
Dont know if you have seen any of my vids but those were all done using this old 800mhz/256meg RAM HP Pavilion that wont even run current games. I havent tried overclocking the CPU in this thing because I am worried about letting the Magic Smoke out and ending up SOL.

And because I just realized what your RCU name is:
"Baldric, just what IS your first name?"
"I think its Sod Off, sir."
"Sod Off?"
"Yes sir. When I was lad I told the other lads, 'Hi, my name is Baldric!' and they told me, 'Yes we know. Sod off, Baldric!'"

IA-Flyer

Even HAL would choke encoding MPEG2.
4 hours, that's no time at all, I encoded 90 minutes of an old VHS capture using TMPGEnc and it took over 70 hours on my 1800XP. It looked much better than the original tape when done, but wow what a wait! [:'(]

Keep your old computer around so you have something to read the groups with while your new one is crunching video!

Rj-TailSpin

Wow, that's deep... not sure what it means... must be a James B. thing...

Those HP's really lack video processing power. They only use 2M... ONBAORD! Can you believe they sold them like that??? I was stupid enough to purchased one for $1,600 from SAMS years ago. I removed the internal modem, the ethernet card, and replaced the memory because it would lockup the system. I "fooled" the onboard video and installed an ATI video board. It really helped a bunch. The HP still runs, but it contracted a virus which killed a bunch of bmp's I had captured with my digital camera. Those HP's are like an entirely different OS. I keep mind around, yet I don't depend upon it.

You will definitely see processing power improvements with your new system. Rendering speed won't change much. I use a 1.7GHz with the AllInWonder 8500DV capture card. Again, Ulead makes you pay for upgrade so beware. The hardware works well though. They have better capture cards out now. If it wasn't for their standard policy of picking pockets of their existing customers... I would upgrade. I figure I am done with them. Next software for me is Adobeeee Premire.

FuBar, I expect an Oscar or alike when you kickup that next system!!! Don't let those little buggs bother you!

Rob

forus

Have any of you managed to cyber fly using lap top screen. I have tried with both USB1 and USB2, but the signal gets delayed enough making it impossible to cyber fly. I have invested in Olympus videoglasses instead, which gives 100% realtime...... I would like to use the pc monitor as a backup though.

jjmav

Forus,

What do you mean by "cyberfly?" Flying through the eye of the onboard camera? If that is the case, tell more about those glasses. How do you input real time video on your pc or laptop? Is it full screen or what?

DOH_Blk_Adder

LOL

forus

Flying realtime is what I meant. I used to fly with fullscreen display on my lap top using Haupauge videocapturing device,USB1. Later I uppgraded to Cameo video converter,USB2.0. The latter device gave better resolution,but there was still a minor delay on the signal. So,yes you can fly display realtime if using the Haupauge or Cameo video capturing devices.
My Olympus Eyetrek 200s allows me to ook up directly to my receiver, avoiding the analog to digital converting process. The video glasses are simply two small monitors (one for each eye) and allows me to fly only looking at the video. I have been using on board camera since 1999, but last saturday was my first fully attempt to fly only by video. I messed up though. I have two video systems.One 300m range which weighs 11g, and one 2km range. I used the small system on a foam wing. I had no problem flying, an my copilot told me where to turn. The world looks quite different from up there.Well, I flew farther away than I thought, and then the vido signal got bad. The tx obviously doesn't like minus temperature (did deepfreezer tests later on...!), and the signal "froze" up.I took of the glasses,but man,where is that little wing. Luckily my copilot is a golfplayer and picked out the point of impact presicely. I went for a looong walk, found the wing undamaged (its a combat wing and can take almost anything). I have decided to wait for the spring before cyberflying again wih this particula system.

Flying by looking at the video is a great experience!

stevennh

How do you like the EyeTrec's? I am shopping for video glasses now for the same use. I flew my aerobird by video using the eyepiece on my DV camcorder this weekend (briefly). I quickly decided I need glasses!

Steve

forus

Steve

Sorry that my reply is late. I am really satisfied with the Eyetreks. The resolution isn't the greatest. They are not usable for computer use. You can't read the text on the folders, or in a Word document unless you enlarge the screen. For DVD and tv they are good enough. If you are going for high resolution glasses you will see that the price is way up there.......probably meant for the pro! When it comes to cyberflying they seem perfect. Maybe I have to get 100hrs of flying before I make a statement. The excitement flying with those glasses may take my focus away from the details concering resolution. I can only say that when flying, I was flying! I didn't fly from the ground, I was on my foam wing. As long as I get that feeling, I am perfectly happy! (I made my own battery pack for it. Buying the original battery costs way to much, I think)

stevennh

I have been watching several different brands of glasses on EBay. I did my first brief remote flying a couple of weeks ago using my camcorders viewfinder. As you can imagine, that setup had it's drawbacks! I ended up resorting to remote flight while fooling around with brief looks at the video while flying. I looked at the video a bit too long and lost sight of the plane. I went back to video and was able to figure out where it was and "buzz" myself at the flying field. Once I saw myself on video I was able to re-aquire the plane by eye. I was only flying by video for 30 seconds or so, but it was very cool.

Thanks for the feedback.

Steve