Thank you for your assistance. As for the wiki, I was thinking of this one
http://openfacts.berlios.de/index-en.phtml?title=Linux+UVC . I'll ask them
if I should put in the info for the cameras I have on there, but I'm not
really sure if it belongs. If I get something started somewhere I'll post
back to this mailing list with a link, but I'm not really in a position to
host it myself right now so we'll see who I can find to do that for us.

On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 6:12 PM, Laurent Pinchart <
[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Daniel,
>
> On Monday 13 July 2009 12:34:04 Daniel Crews wrote:
> > Background:
> > I have been trying to find a good value low cost webcam for computer
> vision
> > on linux. My basic plan is to set the exposure high enough to max the
> > framerate, and use gain to make the markers I'm tracking visible. The
> > ugliness resulting from this shouldn't matter. Unfortunately, there seems
> > to be no list of what webcams allow you to set the exposure manually, and
> > the grab bag of various models I have now all seem to not let you do
> that.
> > I'm looking at trying the Philips SPC 900NC which is said to work with
> the
> > PWC controller, but seems discontinuedish and more expensive than I'd
> like
> > to pay... I'm willing to pay for the quality if I need it(and the product
> > has it!), but I'm making a system where I'll want to add as many cameras
> as
> > possible, so cheap is good (that's why I'm not going for firewire
> cameras,
> > as much as I would like to).
> >
> > Specific questions:
> > 1.)Is there anything wrong with using  "# v4lctl -c /dev/videoX list" to
> > check for manual exposure settings? Or could this command miss a camera
> > that can do it with just the stock UVC driver? (It'd be helpful to see an
> > example of what a camera that can do that would look like as well, eg.
> what
> > to look for.)
>
> It might in theory miss cameras that can do manual exposure, but in
> practice I
> don't think it would. UVC allows for vendor-specific extensions through so-
> called extension units. While a camera could implement manual exposure
> through
> an extension unit, it would make little sense as the UVC standard describes
> how to handle manual exposure through the Camera Terminal.
>
> You can also use lsusb to list controls supported by a camera. Here's a
> snippet of the output with a camera that supports manual exposure:
>
>      VideoControl Interface Descriptor:
>        bLength                18
>        bDescriptorType        36
>        bDescriptorSubtype      2 (INPUT_TERMINAL)
>        bTerminalID             1
>        wTerminalType      0x0201 Camera Sensor
>        bAssocTerminal          0
>        iTerminal               0
>        wObjectiveFocalLengthMin      0
>        wObjectiveFocalLengthMax      0
>        wOcularFocalLength            0
>        bControlSize                  3
>        bmControls           0x0000000a
>          Auto-Exposure Mode
>          Exposure Time (Absolute)
>
> Lokk for an Input Terminal with wTerminalType set to 0x0201 (Camera
> Sensor),
> and check the bmControls field. It's a bit field that lists the supported
> controls. lsusb decodes it for you and will print the meaning of each set
> bit.
>
> > 2.) Is there a list with what cameras do manual exposure? (And what frame
> > rates they can actually reach...)
>
> None that I'm aware of.
>
> > 3.) If not, should we try to extend the current UVC linux cam list with
> > this kind of extra data? Or at least bring this scattered data together
> in
> > a single, if separate, repository? (Perhaps on the wiki...)
>
> I've been thinking of adding lsusb output's for all cameras listed on the
> website. It would also be nice to have a wiki-like page for each camera
> where
> users could put comments. I unfortunately don't have time to work on that
> right now.
>
> > 4.) In the meantime, does anyone have any suggestions? Particularly so if
> > you know of a camera that does infra-red out of box or is easy to mod
> with
> > the exposed film trick, as I'd prefer to make the markers subtle to the
> > human eye.
> > 5.) Some of these questions pertain to this mailing list, let me know if
> > some of them don't and where I should take them elsewhere....?
>
> Best regards,
>
> Laurent Pinchart
>
>


-- 
Fin
_______________________________________________
Linux-uvc-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/linux-uvc-devel

Reply via email to