Hi Guys,
(I'm copying Ezequial on this because of the work he has done on the
stk1160).
My colleague (a Doctor) had this to say on the medical images I posted
earlier (see below):
> The impactVCB-e image is redder and less clear. The dvc100 and
easycap seem similar to me and both of them are not as good as the
original one.
So I have to ask how is it that the cheap little EasyCap is performing
at the same level as the Dazzle DVC100 and better than the ImpactVCB-e?
It seems to me that the more complex and expensive DVC100 and
ImpactVCB-e should perform well and that the EasyCap should be the
runner up.
If the DVC100 and ImpactVCB-e had had the same love and attention that
Ezequial has shown the EasyCap would they outperform it?
The ImpactVCB-e is easier to use internally and the Dazzle is external.
Does the fact that the ImpactVCB-e has a PCI-e connector help it at all?
Otherwise I should just focus on EasyCap for my raw SD capture and move on.
Thanks,
Steve
On 23/04/14 16:22, Steve Cookson wrote:
Hi Guys,
I would be interested in your views of the comparisons of these
images. The still is the image of a duodenum taken during an
endoscopy and recorded to a DVD player (via an s-video or composite
cable). Although the endoscope is an HD endoscope, the DVD recorder
isn't and the resulting video is 720x480i59.94.
Here are further details of the video:-
Format : MPEG Video v2
Format profile : Main@Main
Format settings, BVOP : Yes, Matrix : Custom, GOP : M=3, N=15
Bit rate mode : Variable
Bit rate : 4 566 Kbps
Maximum bit rate : 10 000 Kbps
Width : 720 pixels
Height : 480 pixels
Display aspect ratio : 4:3
Frame rate : 29.970 fps
Standard : NTSC
Color space : YUV
Chroma subsampling : 4:2:0
Bit depth : 8 bits
Scan type : Interlaced
Scan order : Top Field First
Compression mode : Lossy
Bits/(Pixel*Frame) : 0.441
The video was played through Dragon Player and the video signal has
exited through a mini-VGA port defined as 640x480 and passed through a
VGA->S-Video converter to an s-video cable.
The cable has in turn been connected in turn to a Dazzle DVC100, an
EasyCap stk1160 and a Hauppauge ImapctVCB-e.
Each setting (eg brightness and contrast etc) has as near as possible
to mid-range and a screengrab taken.
The results are shown here:
Original:
http://tinypic.com/usermedia.php?uo=fNkd6hpTbcMrgmD6gSf74Ih4l5k2TGxc
Dazzle DVC100:
http://tinypic.com/usermedia.php?uo=fNkd6hpTbcMaOf4QTsIefYh4l5k2TGxc
ImpactVCB-e:
http://tinypic.com/usermedia.php?uo=fNkd6hpTbcM7i72IqGujuIh4l5k2TGxc
STK1160:
http://tinypic.com/usermedia.php?uo=fNkd6hpTbcPO7kmQk/IS94h4l5k2TGxc
I would be grateful for your views on the quality of the images.
Is one of materially higher quality than the others, or can I adjust
the settings to improve the quality of one of them more.
It seems to me that the Hauppauge is marginally better than the
others. What do you think?
Can I improve the test?
Regards
Steve.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
