Rank: Newbie
Groups: Registered
Joined: 6/12/2016(UTC) Posts: 4 Location: Buenos Aires
|
Hi guys, im starting a podcast where 3 people talk, sitted in a room... i'm about to buy 3 Logitech C930e webcams to use with Vmix... I have a pretty good computer (I7 - 16gb ram - ssds - gaming video card)... Is there any known problems with what im thinking?
Thx!
|
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Registered
Joined: 6/6/2016(UTC) Posts: 106 Location: UK
Thanks: 2 times Was thanked: 13 time(s) in 12 post(s)
|
I run a few c920s connected to Vmix, but my use case is slightly different to your intention. I use mine connected to a remote PC, running Vmix. I mostly cover conferences and presentations so if someone has a demo table set up, I place the webcams around the table and switch shots using the remote web app for that Vmix session on a tablet PC. The remote switched feed is then sent back to my main production area and integrated into another switcher. And that works fine for me as I'm using a closed in shot, but for your intent.. I think the thing that webcams suffers most is framing a shot, webcams have a fixed lens, you can only place the shot by moving the webcam and if your trying to do head shots that could be an issue with trying to frame 3 headshots to look "equal". Think of all the differing shots you see when running Skype in conference mode, or Google hangouts etc. Look at this link, paying attention of the framing of people in the lower right of image. https://www.google.co.uk...&iact=mrc&uact=8The one good thing is all 3 presenters here will be seated. There's always something wrong when people try to frame an on stage shot of a presenter etc with a webcamera or mobile phone camera, the presenter is almost lost in the wide shot. So concentrate on the framing, get that right and you should be OK. Also the webcam lens is mostly wide angle, not as bad as a go-pro but usual 100° or about, so again it might impact on the framing. You may also need to stick with a 720 workflow, you might be a little limited with usb bandwidth if trying to get 3 or so 1080 feeds into that one PC, but YMMV? A. ( edited to correct 'auto correct' spelling errors )
|
|
|
|
Rank: Newbie
Groups: Registered
Joined: 6/12/2016(UTC) Posts: 4 Location: Buenos Aires
|
Thanks for your reply! Mainly i want half-torso shots, not just the face... i dont want it to lose frames or appear choppy... The 3 webcams would go into a single pc which would be running vMix.
Would the usb bandwidth bottleneck be still there if i get an extra pcie-usb interface?
Thx
|
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Registered
Joined: 6/6/2016(UTC) Posts: 106 Location: UK
Thanks: 2 times Was thanked: 13 time(s) in 12 post(s)
|
Pliplo wrote:Thanks for your reply! Mainly i want half-torso shots, not just the face... i dont want it to lose frames or appear choppy... The 3 webcams would go into a single pc which would be running vMix.
Would the usb bandwidth bottleneck be still there if i get an extra pcie-usb interface?
Thx A "torso" shot should be fine, just remember the wide angle of the webcam, and place the cam at a reasonable height. no low, up the nose shots 😁 re, usb pcie cards... It depends on the card and how it processes the usb connections. Each 1080P video source is almost 3gb wide, USB3 b/width is 5gb wide 3sources x 3gb = more than 5gb. 720P signals are 1.5gb wide 3x 720P = 4.5gb There are cards that have individual chips on each port, so they dont share the 5gb amongst the connected sources, but give the full 5gb on each port. StarTech's PEXUSB3S44V PCIe 4-Port USB3.0 card is an example. So if you install something like that you should be able to grab all 3 cams at 1080 video with reasonable frame rates. A.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Registered
Joined: 8/21/2015(UTC) Posts: 324 Location: Cornwall, Ontario, Canada Thanks: 18 times Was thanked: 80 time(s) in 60 post(s)
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Registered
Joined: 6/6/2016(UTC) Posts: 106 Location: UK
Thanks: 2 times Was thanked: 13 time(s) in 12 post(s)
|
These look interesting, although there is a current thread running on them. http://www.forums.vmix.c....aspx?g=posts&t=6127And yes in total agreement, don't run with the mics from these or any webcam. Always use separate mics. In this scenario i'd suggest lapel mics on each of the three presenters. A. Edit. Desmar, if you use these cameras, how are they controlled via the PC? ( I'm guessing via a web app) maybe via a mobile app? not sure if vmix controls ptz functions on these natively, as with Panasonic, Sony and ptz optics cameras, noticed they only zoom as a digital zoom, no optical zoom which is a shame. But at the price, we can't have it all. A.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Registered
Joined: 8/21/2015(UTC) Posts: 324 Location: Cornwall, Ontario, Canada Thanks: 18 times Was thanked: 80 time(s) in 60 post(s)
|
No I do not use them at the moment, will probably purchase some in the near future..
They are Digital Zoom, not optical... and not integrated into vMix
Great HTTP based API, going to write my own software for PTZ feature and presets as I only have vMix basic HD that doesn't support PTZ... or use the web based software or app...
Can't justify paying for vMix Pro at this time...
|
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Registered
Joined: 7/1/2015(UTC) Posts: 1,151 Location: Houston TX Thanks: 319 times Was thanked: 263 time(s) in 233 post(s)
|
I've used multiple Logitech webcams many times before. If you set them for MJPEG encoding you will save a lot of fussing about USB bus management. I'd avoid H264 mode simply because it adds a lot of latency to the video stream.
The primary difference between the C920 and C930e is the field of view. That is, if you skip using the Logitech driver for the C920, which is key to using more than one on a host computer.
You might consider the BCC950 Conference Cam. It's audio is largely pointless, but a real PTZ can be useful to better frame up the shot. The PTZ Pro Camera is even better, but dramatically more $.
|
1 user thanked mjgraves for this useful post.
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Registered
Joined: 7/1/2015(UTC) Posts: 1,151 Location: Houston TX Thanks: 319 times Was thanked: 263 time(s) in 233 post(s)
|
AElli wrote:Each 1080P video source is almost 3gb wide, USB3 b/width is 5gb wide 3sources x 3gb = more than 5gb. 720P signals are 1.5gb wide 3x 720P = 4.5gb Remember, Logitech doesn't make any USB 3.0 webcams. They achieve 1080P by using MJPEG or H264 encoding on the cameras. That allows them to pass it over a USB 2.0 connection. You cannot get 1080P30 from a C930e using uncompressed (YUY2.) You must use MJPEG or H264. That said, you might be able to get 1080P at some arbitrarily low frame-rate (maybe 10 f/s), but I consider that a failure. I'd never sacrifice frame-rate for resolution.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Newbie
Groups: Registered
Joined: 6/12/2016(UTC) Posts: 4 Location: Buenos Aires
|
Thank you all for your replys! I wont be using any of the cam's audio... Since i have a recording studio and lot of quality dynamic microphones... Yeah, i wouldn't like to sacrifice frame rate for resolution either...
I'd imagine i want to use cameras connected to either my pc or a capture card, i dont want the hassle of configuring anything to work via network or something like that... Specially cause i have a really good pc... I see good quad-bus (4 x 5 gbps) 4-port usb 3.0 pci-e interfaces for 80 dollars...
So my only thing is getting 3 cams (maybe adding one more for a general shot of the room and all the people sitting there) that work well with this idea... im ok with spending more than 100 dollars per camera, if there's something significantly better, and a couple hundred in a capture card or usb card if its worth it...
As for PTZ and all that, none of the shots will move or pan or anything, i want fixed cameras that have a nice shot at the people talking, no camera movement whatsoever... Would the BCC950 still be worth it with that in mind?
|
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Registered
Joined: 7/1/2015(UTC) Posts: 1,151 Location: Houston TX Thanks: 319 times Was thanked: 263 time(s) in 233 post(s)
|
Pliplo wrote:As for PTZ and all that, none of the shots will move or pan or anything, i want fixed cameras that have a nice shot at the people talking, no camera movement whatsoever... Would the BCC950 still be worth it with that in mind? The value of the PTZ is not always in the ability to change the shot on-the-fly. It can be flexibility in being able to place the cameras and still frame the shot well. The C920 and C930e are fine webcams, but their fixed field of view may well define where you must place each to achieve the desired shot. I find that the PTZ function of the BCC950 is handy, even on my desktop. I have two monitors placed side-by-side. If I leave a few inches between the displays I can put the BCC950 between them. Then the zoom ability lets me control how much of the background is in the shot. The BCC950 as a limited zoom range, but it's enough in this application. If your production is 720p or less you can fake this with a C920/C930e by setting the camera for 1080p30 (MJPEG) and zooming/cropping the shot. Digital zooming like this will always cause some loss of image quality, but it can be acceptable to some people.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Newbie
Groups: Registered
Joined: 6/12/2016(UTC) Posts: 4 Location: Buenos Aires
|
Ohh, i get it, so is de bcc950 superior even if im not panning anything? i mean spec wise...
Im starting to think 720p is pretty acceptable for a talkshow podcast, specially since i rather not sacrifice framerate por the extra resolution, plus i know no one watches a podcast fullscreen...
|
|
|
|
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.
Important Information:
The vMix Forums uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies.
More Details
Close