A well supported webcam - Hardware

This is a discussion on A well supported webcam - Hardware ; Hi there, I'd like to buy a webcam well supported in Linux (640x480 dpi and 1.3 Mpixel, perhaps with integrated microphone, should be enough for me). The problem is that vendors don't say anything about the chipset their webcams use, ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: A well supported webcam

  1. A well supported webcam

    Hi there,

    I'd like to buy a webcam well supported in Linux (640x480 dpi and
    1.3 Mpixel, perhaps with integrated microphone, should be enough for me).
    The problem is that vendors don't say anything about the chipset their
    webcams use, so how to figure out if a certain webcam is supported?
    Maybe asking here if anyone has had such an experience... :-)

    Is anyone using the Trust WB-3320X

    (http://www.trust.com/products/produc...spx?item=15354)

    and/or the WB-3250p

    (http://www.trust.com/products/produc...x?item=15082)?

    Could anyone suggest me some other well supported model?

    Many thanks in advance.


    --
    hamradio@toglimi.quipo.it
    ANTI-SPAM: please cut "toglimi." for my real e-mail address.
    Powered by Linux 2.6.20 on Debian Etch
    Registered Linux user #291116 http://counter.li.org

  2. Re: A well supported webcam

    http://www.linux-usb.org/

    http://www.linux-usb.org/devices.html#multi

    Trust appears to be supported. CPiA list1.


    http://www.linux1394.org/

    http://wiki.linux1394.org/video1394


    > Is anyone using the Trust WB-3320X
    >
    > (http://www.trust.com/products/produc...spx?item=15354)


    > and/or the WB-3250p
    >
    > (http://www.trust.com/products/produc...x?item=15082)?



    Not that it's always applicable since vendors can switch the chipset in
    use without changing the model number or external design of the device.
    It's a lot easier to tell once you have the device as you can google on
    the vendor:device numbers. lsusb -n (just like lspci -n)

    I couldn't find those specific models. But I did find some earlier
    reviews on the lower model numbers that absolutely hated them for their
    low picture quality. Many of which got returned within a week of
    purchase. Not that that's applicable. YMMV

  3. Re: A well supported webcam

    On 29 Jan 2008 18:38:30 GMT, HamRadio wrote:

    >Hi there,
    >
    >I'd like to buy a webcam well supported in Linux (640x480 dpi and
    >1.3 Mpixel, perhaps with integrated microphone, should be enough for me).
    >The problem is that vendors don't say anything about the chipset their
    >webcams use, so how to figure out if a certain webcam is supported?
    >Maybe asking here if anyone has had such an experience... :-)
    >
    >Is anyone using the Trust WB-3320X
    >
    >(http://www.trust.com/products/produc...spx?item=15354)
    >
    >and/or the WB-3250p
    >
    >(http://www.trust.com/products/produc...x?item=15082)?
    >
    >Could anyone suggest me some other well supported model?
    >
    >Many thanks in advance.


    Just a heads-up on cams to stay away from - anything from Philips. Their drivers are
    terrible and they are never updated. Their tech support is awful and even if you do
    receive a response, it'll sound like it came from a complete moron with no knowledge
    of the product. They advertise a frame rate of 90fps for their SPC900NC webcam but
    it actually only does 15fps max when recording video in monitor mode. Here are the
    specs: http://www.p4c.philips.com/files/s/s...00_pss_eng.pdf
    Their control program doesn't even have a 90fps setting and when I asked their tech
    support why this was, they 'fired' back an email about a week later saying that new
    Vista drivers are available. I had not only told them three times that I was using
    XP Pro but had also sent them screen caps of the control app that showed all
    available fps settings - minus the advertised 90fps setting. I wanted to mail them
    back and ask 'what's the difference between an orange' but thought that would
    completely blow their tiny minds. Good luck

    HJS

  4. Re: A well supported webcam

    > On 29 Jan 2008 18:38:30 GMT, HamRadio
    > wrote:
    >
    >>Hi there,
    >>
    >>I'd like to buy a webcam well supported in Linux (640x480 dpi and
    >>1.3 Mpixel, perhaps with integrated microphone, should be enough for me).
    >>The problem is that vendors don't say anything about the chipset their
    >>webcams use, so how to figure out if a certain webcam is supported?
    >>Maybe asking here if anyone has had such an experience... :-)


    I can't suggest anything in particular as I've had horrible luck... But I
    find that it's not the CAM part that's difficult, it's getting the
    microphone to work.



  5. Re: A well supported webcam

    On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 18:38:30 +0000, HamRadio wrote:

    > Hi there,
    >
    > I'd like to buy a webcam well supported in Linux (640x480 dpi and
    > 1.3 Mpixel, perhaps with integrated microphone, should be enough for me).
    > The problem is that vendors don't say anything about the chipset their
    > webcams use, so how to figure out if a certain webcam is supported?
    > Maybe asking here if anyone has had such an experience... :-)


    I have a Logitech QuickCam Messenger and although I 'see' an image the
    quality is bad. I also don't have any option to choose between resolution.
    Never got it working correctly.

    I also have a Sony Unibrain firewire camera and that works great. If you
    want use it as a webcam you will need to use the vloopback device to make
    it work via 4VL

    Just my E0.02
    --

    Arend van der Boom
    #-----//--$5699r--@#-~~~~~/\-------------
    Home : http://home.caiway.nl/~avdboom
    LCARS : http://lcarsscan.dyndns.org


  6. Re: A well supported webcam

    In article ,
    Arend van der Boom wrote:
    > On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 18:38:30 +0000, HamRadio wrote:
    >
    > > Hi there,
    > >
    > > I'd like to buy a webcam well supported in Linux (640x480 dpi and
    > > 1.3 Mpixel, perhaps with integrated microphone, should be enough for me).
    > > The problem is that vendors don't say anything about the chipset their
    > > webcams use, so how to figure out if a certain webcam is supported?
    > > Maybe asking here if anyone has had such an experience... :-)

    >
    > I have a Logitech QuickCam Messenger and although I 'see' an image the
    > quality is bad. I also don't have any option to choose between resolution.
    > Never got it working correctly.
    >
    > I also have a Sony Unibrain firewire camera and that works great. If you
    > want use it as a webcam you will need to use the vloopback device to make
    > it work via 4VL
    >
    > Just my E0.02


    I have an Intel "Create and Share" (CS430) USB camera. All I've figured
    out to do with so far is view the image using XawTV. Is that it? What
    I'd like to do is feed it to some IM program and do video chat, but no
    multi-protocol IM programs do video AFAIK. Do they now?

    --
    -eben QebWenE01R@vTerYizUonI.nOetP royalty.mine.nu:81

    An idea that is not dangerous is unworthy of
    being called an idea at all. -Oscar Wilde

+ Reply to Thread