Tuesday, April 3, 2007
Looking Forward
The photo to the left was taken Sunday afternoon to see if mounting a helmet cam to my pannier would make a good vantage point. I thought it would. So this morning I decided to mount my new Oregon Scientific ATC2K helmet cam that I purchased on eBay two weeks ago to get the same view on video. I hadn't used it prior to today, so I was excited about putting it to the test.The ATC2K is a self-contained waterproof color video camera that uses a 2.0 GB SD card and runs on two AA batteries. With a maximum resolution of 640x480 at 30 fps, it can record up to an hour of footage. I thought it should make an excellent back-up camera. For $150, I figured I couldn't go wrong.
The ATC2K is cylindrical-shaped; about the size of a toilet paper roll. The mounting clip that it comes with has a curved surface area of approximately a mere 1.5 x 2 inches and has slots on each end for using what looks like a velcro arm band. It is not the ideal design for attaching securely to a motorcycle.
After figuring out a way to attach it to the pannier, I noticed that the camera was facing downward about 15 degrees because of the pannier design. I needed the cam to sit level for the video to look like my test shot above, so I created a makeshift "wedge" out of corrugated board from a U-Haul box, tape, and velcro. It didn't exactly come out pretty, but it served its purpose. One problem I know I'll have despite what the final "wedge" is made of is vibration. The panniers have only one peg that each attach to at the top and a single rail to rest on, making it a poor place to attach a cam. There's a chance that resting a duffle bag across the rear seat and panniers will help reduce the vibration. It'll be something new to test out in the coming weeks.With the "wedge" in place, I attached the ATC2K and secured it with the arm band strap - which later proved a smart idea. Rent was due and so my first test was a quick jaunt up to the clubhouse a short ways away. In the video, you'll see that the "wedge" did the trick getting the camera angle right. I'm very pleased with the new perspective, but as I suspected, you'll see there is a lot of vibration. I decided to take a tip from Peter's video and actually speak to the camera this time, but for some reason, the sound is completely muffled. I'll have to check to see if there are different mic settings.
Because the ATC2K stayed in place for its maiden voyage, I left it on the bike for its second test - the 14 mile ride into work. It was about 45 degrees out and so between the cold, wind, weight of the camera, and constant bouncing, the ATC2K broke loose of the velcro (from the adhesive side) at about 12 miles into the ride. Thankfully the strap was in place, otherwise the dangled camera would've been a mangled camera instead.
Comments:
<< Home
I decided to spend a little time this evening troubleshooting the sound issue with my ATC2K. There was nothing in the manual addressing it, so I made a few test videos at maximum resolution (640x480) and maximum frames per second (30). Although it reduces record time to 1 hour, I wanted to maximize the video quality for DVD reproduction. But after a few tests, I found that not only did the audio still sound muffled, but it came out like the classic Godzilla movies with the lag time.
My next series of tests were at different resolution and fps settings. The ATC2K has a total of 6 recording combinations, each with different total record time abilities. Here's the breakdown according to the manual:
HIGH RESOLUTION
640 x 480 @ 30 fps = 1:00
640 x 480 @ 15 fps = 1:36
MEDIUM RESOLUTION
320 x 240 @ 30 fps = 2:02
320 x 240 @ 15 fps = 3:50
LOW RESOLUTION
160 x 120 @ 30 fps = 5:56
160 x 120 @ 15 fps = 13:14
Because the LOW RESOLUTION options produce videos only 1-5/8" in diagonal size (just shy of an iPod Nano's screen), I don't think this is a worthwhile option.
The MEDIUM RESOLUTION options produce videos in 3-1/4" diagonal size with "excellent" sound that actually plays in time with the video. At 15 fps, the smoothness of the video suffers moderately, but offers almost another 2 hours of record time. At 30 fps, the MEDIUM RESOLUTION may be the best compromise of time, and sound and video quality.
If recording in MAXIMUM RESOLUTION (6-1/2" diagonal size), whether at 30 or 15 fps, the only videos worth recording are ones intended to have music or dialogue overdubbed in post-production due to the lag between the audio and video.
Post a Comment
My next series of tests were at different resolution and fps settings. The ATC2K has a total of 6 recording combinations, each with different total record time abilities. Here's the breakdown according to the manual:
HIGH RESOLUTION
640 x 480 @ 30 fps = 1:00
640 x 480 @ 15 fps = 1:36
MEDIUM RESOLUTION
320 x 240 @ 30 fps = 2:02
320 x 240 @ 15 fps = 3:50
LOW RESOLUTION
160 x 120 @ 30 fps = 5:56
160 x 120 @ 15 fps = 13:14
Because the LOW RESOLUTION options produce videos only 1-5/8" in diagonal size (just shy of an iPod Nano's screen), I don't think this is a worthwhile option.
The MEDIUM RESOLUTION options produce videos in 3-1/4" diagonal size with "excellent" sound that actually plays in time with the video. At 15 fps, the smoothness of the video suffers moderately, but offers almost another 2 hours of record time. At 30 fps, the MEDIUM RESOLUTION may be the best compromise of time, and sound and video quality.
If recording in MAXIMUM RESOLUTION (6-1/2" diagonal size), whether at 30 or 15 fps, the only videos worth recording are ones intended to have music or dialogue overdubbed in post-production due to the lag between the audio and video.
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]