SPC900 vs. Xbox Live webcam vs. Lifecam Cinema

[stonemonkeylives]

Thanks for the comparison, I have a couple of the Xbox cams lying around, already modded one and still trying to get the hang of it and sharpcap, so I'll be interested on how the PlayStation one performs. Been looking for a SPC900 on eBay for ages but as mentioned before are rare as Dodos these days.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2

[JamesF]

You can select frame rate, gain, exposure and RGB levels. All you need really. For more info on the exposure setting, I suggest reading the following:

http://codelaborator.../viewthread/60/

What driver version (and where from) do you have?

I'm currently being offered no controls other than resolution in SharpCap.

James

[russellhq]

What driver version (and where from) do you have?

I'm currently being offered no controls other than resolution in SharpCap.

James

It's the CL Eye Platform Driver, found here: http://codelaboratories.com/downloads/ Version: 5.1.1.0317 Date: 11/12/2012 Filesize: 5.16MB

Within Sharcap, the Gain, Exposure and RGB levels are access from the menu under "Video Filter" from memory. The framerate and resolution are access from the menu under "Video PIN".

[JamesF]

Aha! Found them. I wonder why they're there rather than in the main menus?

James

[russellhq]

I've no idea, I think it must be the way the driver has been put together. It get's trickier when you try to use it with PHD as you don't get to see the framerate, but I can explain a way to do it if you go down that route.

[JamesF]

Well, it was a bit of a fight and in fact I still might take it apart again and replace the lens mount with one that isn't covered in the remains of the glue used to hold the original lens in, but I now have a modded Playstation Eye camera complete with 1.25" nosepiece. Roll on those clear nights, and I'll report back once I've had a play with it. Some time in 2015 then...

James

[russellhq]

Getting the lens out is mighty tricky without removing the entire mount!

For settings I'd suggest exposure, R, G & B sliders are all set to the far right (and kept that way) and gain slider set around 50%. Then chose a frame rate of 30fps @ 640x480. That should at least guarantee an image. Once you have jupiter, try going for 60fps and dropping the gain and if exposure looks low then try upping the gain. You'll soon get the hang of it!

[JamesF]

Thanks. I'll try those settings and see where I get.

The lens was glued into the mount absolutely solidly on my camera. I had to resort to a vice and pliers and I'm a little concerned that I may have distorted the lens mount. I have a couple of webcams that are pretty much useless for anything though, so I might scavenge the mount from one of those to replace it.

James

[WaveSoarer]

I've been taking a few images of Jupiter with my xbox webcam and I've been posting these on Cliff's original thread where he described the modification. I'll put this one up, again, here. The image is composed of a photoshop composite where Jupiter itself was taken from a stack of images with the camera set with a reasonable exposure and the second component, containing only Ganymede, was cropped from a stack of images with Jupiter overexposed. I played around with the wavelets feature in RegiStax to bring out some more detail than would have otherwise been visible with the original image from stacking (this also brings Ganymede in to view which is just above the noise). The composite has a ring artefact around Jupiter removed, which seems to come from structured noise around the image of the planet. When running the avi this can be seen as an enhancement of the noise near to bright objects. I've also seen this with Venus where the crescent has an envelope of a fuzzy brighter area. Incidentally, I've been using a 3x Barlow and I don't get the same size of image on the sensor as James has been seeing. I can only really get this by using the combination of a 2x and 3x Barlow but this does make things fairly fuzzy.

[JamesF]

I think that's pretty good. There's a fair amount of detail there. Well done.

The reason you're not getting the same image size is probably all down to focal length. The image size is proportional to focal length. I'm using a scope with a native focal length of 1500mm with a 2.5x barlow and an extension which probably combine to an increase of getting close to 3.5x for an effective focal length of around five metres. With your 3x barlow you're only reaching a focal length of 3.6m in the 200P.

The negative side of increasing the focal length is that you're "spreading the light out" more so each individual pixel receives less. If the camera is sufficiently sensitive to light that's perhaps not a problem, but when it's a bit noisy and not so sensitive you start to see the fuzziness you're getting.

James

[WaveSoarer]

Thanks James. That makes a lot of sense. I think that the xbox camera is good for learning on and it's been fun to try to squeeze as much out of it as possible. I'm still stunned by the results you're getting. My colleagues at the synchrotron find them jaw dropping.

[JamesF]

I agree about the Xbox camera. For the £5 or whatever it costs I think the Xbox camera is always worth a go when you're starting out imaging. It may well not give the kind of images some people are posting here, but it will allow you to do a good deal of the learning that goes with planetary imaging at minimal cost and in a hobby that no-one could describe as cheap I think that's no bad thing.

It's always a pleasure to hear that other people enjoy the images

James

[Space Cowboy]

Yes indeed the spc 900 is way better than any other webcam. Good comparison James though why are you not using AS!2 for stacking as you wont get those horrible cracks that reg 6 produces?.

I'm sure there are plenty of spc 900s out there that people are sitting on the amount that were sold a couple of years ago.

The margin of improvement is much smaller when going up to the DFK/DBK compared to moving from an xbox cam which personally I would trample under foot and not waste my time with. I don't know why people make a fuss about spending 50 quid on a spc900 when they spend hundreds on their scope setup? I made that mistake starting off with a cheap cam and it was a total waste of my time. Clear skys are precious in the UK so don't waste them on cheap rubbish.

[JamesF]

My experience with Registax v6 is that when it does a good job, it does it better than either Registax v5 or AS!2. Unfortunately it can't be relied upon to do a good job in which case I might fiddle with the stacking to see if I can talk it round, or feed it all into AS!2.

I'm quite prepared to accept that it's a subjective judgement, to be honest, and which one works better may have a dependency on the scope and camera as well. As it appears to be a choice between being waterboarded by Mother Nature or staying indoors tonight, I might well have a bash at reprocessing the images here and perhaps have another go at the drizzle option too, as I couldn't get anywhere positive with that either last time.

James

[Space Cowboy]

1.5x drizzle works well in AS!2 depending on the seeing and how many alignment points you use. In good seeing alignment box size 50 works well but sometimes in poorer seeing this produces some cracks so box 100 is best.

Would be interesting to see how those lifecam shots came out in AS!2.

Apologies for any offence given to xbox cam owners but this cam looks interesting using the same sensor as spc900 : http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/166295-v-gear-talkcam-tracer-ccd-webcam-as-alternative-to-spc900nc/page__st__20

[tingting44]

wow cant believe i have just seen this thread!!

great write up james, loved reading through this, my SPC900 should be here tomorrow and i can not blooming wait lol

here's to clear skies!

Martin