-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Video Camera Glasses
- Thread starter SIY
- Start date
OP
- Thread Starter
- #23
I know his channel well, learned a lot from it. Not that I would ever possess lock-picking tools in NY state, nossir.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #24
Exactly so.
or something similar.
If not the goPro
Prana Ferox
Addicted to Fun and Learning
As someone who regularly watches maker videos with people fumbling around with tiny screws (or tiny crimps into tiny multipin connectors) the issue with most cameras is that they don't really focus at arms reach, especially if those arms are pulled up close so the maker can see what they're doing
E: if what you want isn't a POV camera but a macro camera, the obvious answer is a nice camera with a macro lens, they all do video these days and most of them can stream directly
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2016
- Messages
- 20,952
- Likes
- 38,078
OP
- Thread Starter
- #28
That's been suggested, but I have a lot of reasons to truly want POV. The "spy glasses" would be nice if the cameras were better and the lenses were clear, and I'm hoping to find something like that.
EERecordist
Active Member
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2024
- Messages
- 131
- Likes
- 148
We have high expectations for video and sound now. So your production will benefit from a lavalier as close to your mouth as possible. Then you might want to run your footage through software to remove the shakeycam. Some of the repair video channels use more than one camera on tripods, and you can move the camera that is not selected, either with a switcher, or in post production editing. Cutting between dissimilar cameras or lighting introduces more work to make it look compatible.
Once you get your production working, sure ASR would enjoy watching.
Once you get your production working, sure ASR would enjoy watching.
As someone who uses multiple ILC cameras, special mics, a field recorder, all sync'd via SMPTE timecode, I think i can offer some words of wisdom if you will.
1) unless you are doing something like skiing, mountain biking, skydiving, fishing, or something else that requires a POV perspective don't use a wearable camera. Movement (even tiny ones) can be very jarring to the audience.
2) Lights are more important than the camera! Generally speaking you will get better results with more light and a cheap camera than you will with an expensive camera and less light. Spend $50 to $100 and pick one or more led shop lights.
3) unless you already have a camera that costs several hundred dollars or are willing to spend $500+, you are probably better off using the smartphone you most likely already have. It will have a bigger screen than almost any camera (has lots of benefits), you are likely to buy. It will also do just fine when you add lighting. Since it uses a small sensor, it will automatically have a greater depth of field, and that's what you want for what you say you want to record. Get yourself a cheap arca-swiss compatible tripod with a boom, and a phone mount and you will be good to go. A mini tripod could be a nice extra if you want to experiment with different angles.
4) depending on how close you are to your phone you might be able to get away with the built in mic. If you can't, or don't like the sound you get, you can get a cheap wireless lavalier mic like this, that you can plug into your phone directly.
If you want I can recommend stuff to help with post processing, but that depends a lot on what kind of computer you have.
1) unless you are doing something like skiing, mountain biking, skydiving, fishing, or something else that requires a POV perspective don't use a wearable camera. Movement (even tiny ones) can be very jarring to the audience.
2) Lights are more important than the camera! Generally speaking you will get better results with more light and a cheap camera than you will with an expensive camera and less light. Spend $50 to $100 and pick one or more led shop lights.
3) unless you already have a camera that costs several hundred dollars or are willing to spend $500+, you are probably better off using the smartphone you most likely already have. It will have a bigger screen than almost any camera (has lots of benefits), you are likely to buy. It will also do just fine when you add lighting. Since it uses a small sensor, it will automatically have a greater depth of field, and that's what you want for what you say you want to record. Get yourself a cheap arca-swiss compatible tripod with a boom, and a phone mount and you will be good to go. A mini tripod could be a nice extra if you want to experiment with different angles.
4) depending on how close you are to your phone you might be able to get away with the built in mic. If you can't, or don't like the sound you get, you can get a cheap wireless lavalier mic like this, that you can plug into your phone directly.
If you want I can recommend stuff to help with post processing, but that depends a lot on what kind of computer you have.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2020
- Messages
- 4,848
- Likes
- 3,773
A smartphone is capable and a good suggestion if it's all you have, however, I do recommend a dedicated camera for not just quality, but for the fact that it's easy to overheat a smartphone recording a lot of video with the screen on. It can degrade your battery, which is sensitive to heat.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #32
I'm imagining holding the smartphone and turning it on and off while using two hands on the project. I should have been born a Motie.
Thanks to all for the help. It looks like the product I really want (glasses with a high res high sensitivity camera) isn't out there so I'll have to improvise with something else like a head-mounted camera and try to work around the parallax issues.
GoPro Mini with DIY headband can be good candid.
At around 1 feet distance (Just guessing) quality would probably be OK for Camera Glasses. Following video has some stills and close video recording of various things.
for branded Rayban Glasses video review is here (Some close object video recordings are there, which may simulate the thing you intend to do)
At around 1 feet distance (Just guessing) quality would probably be OK for Camera Glasses. Following video has some stills and close video recording of various things.
restorer-john
Grand Contributor
Tried the Go-Pro taped on my head. First attempt pulled out a whole bunch of hair getting it off. LOL.
Seriously, the 2nd attempt I taped a Go-Pro to the band of head gripping headphones.
It's a total bust. Not even going to post the footage as it looks like bad drone footage, less jerky than I expected, but totally unusable even with me deliberately moving my head (and what I was looking at) slowly. The semi fish-eye lens doesn't help with it either. It's just totally detached from the item I am looking at by the 4 or 5 inches up from my eyes.
I think if it was zoomed (different lens) to show detail, the accentuated movement would be worse.
Seriously, the 2nd attempt I taped a Go-Pro to the band of head gripping headphones.
It's a total bust. Not even going to post the footage as it looks like bad drone footage, less jerky than I expected, but totally unusable even with me deliberately moving my head (and what I was looking at) slowly. The semi fish-eye lens doesn't help with it either. It's just totally detached from the item I am looking at by the 4 or 5 inches up from my eyes.
I think if it was zoomed (different lens) to show detail, the accentuated movement would be worse.
Prana Ferox
Addicted to Fun and Learning
In fairness to restorer-john the newer action-cams have anti-shake features built in and are in other ways worlds beyond a GP3. Plus a forehead mount would be the way to go.
I've seen streamers do POV with the Apple Vision thing... it is certainly a look, and certainly not one I'd buy the Apple Vision thing for.
I've seen streamers do POV with the Apple Vision thing... it is certainly a look, and certainly not one I'd buy the Apple Vision thing for.
ta240
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2019
- Messages
- 1,509
- Likes
- 3,004
The newer cameras and forehead mounts do seem to work pretty well. His isn't up-close work but these are generally quite smooth movements. The only exception is on a larger TV when he walks around the car the slight bobbing movement is a bit much.
The issue with IBIS is that it can only handle very small movements, it doesn't mater if you are using a $500 GoPro or a $7000 FF mirrorless system. They are all do it the same way, by moving the sensor around (using magnets in most cases).
Even if you do stabilization in post, you will face different issues.
For example watch the trees in the video, after he enables stabilization.
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2020
- Messages
- 4,848
- Likes
- 3,773
IBIS is one thing (physical).
But other cameras, such as the Pixel, advanced mirrorless ILC camers, and probably GoPro as well, also do electronic stabilization, ie they crop the sides of each frame by how much is needed to keep the center at the center, if you know what I mean.
It can also be done in post, as described above.
But other cameras, such as the Pixel, advanced mirrorless ILC camers, and probably GoPro as well, also do electronic stabilization, ie they crop the sides of each frame by how much is needed to keep the center at the center, if you know what I mean.
It can also be done in post, as described above.
Prana Ferox
Addicted to Fun and Learning
GoPro etc are all digital processing, not mechanical stabilization. For video mechanical stabilization you'd want some sort of gimbal rig but for casual users it's not worth it.
And it may make outdoor shots look weird but if you're doing maker stuff in your shop (or just instructional stuff in general) you're probably less concerned about that and more concerned about whatever widget you're (no pun intended) focusing on
And it may make outdoor shots look weird but if you're doing maker stuff in your shop (or just instructional stuff in general) you're probably less concerned about that and more concerned about whatever widget you're (no pun intended) focusing on
The first couple minutes of that video made me seasick -- and I was watching on a computer monitor. And the picture seemed hyper-real, like soap operas back in the 1970s. I'll refrain from commenting on the driver's techniques/ skills.
