-
But as I read you also got yourself a HD7850 and that one didn't work neither..
The drivers wouldn't install, so haven't actually tried it yet.
It does 1080P 6-fps video encoding in hardware, so yeah, should work.QuoteI can imagine aside from video capture , you would probably do stuff like looking up datasheets, viewing CAD work (always nice to know what to probe) and running some firmware debugger tools.
However keep in mind the other i7 (desktop model) has way more raw horsepower, but it can also be gross overkill if the only thing you do is internet & programming.
Any machine will handle all the everyday tasks on a bench, so this machine needs to do one thing only, encode 1080P 60fps video to MP4 from USB 3.0 + audio. -
Where are you at trying to sort this out? Was that message you posted on Twitter referring to another instance of the AMD install or were you running some other install/upgrade at the same time? I have seen similar messages when trying several upgrades simultaneously.
Tell me you can be sure it isn't something stupid like inadvertently click starting the install when it was scripted to automatically start.
Yes, I can be sure. I even learned how to go into Windows services and disable the currently installing flag, uninstalled video drivers and rebooted countless times and it still didn't work, got the same stupid install error message using both by the disk that came with the card and also the latest downloaded version. -
Well, I assume there isn't a rash of reports about this on their support site. In which case it seems probable that something peculiar to your system is at the root of it.
Yes, very likely, but I'm not going to nuke my machine to fix it. I think I've done as much as I can without nuking it.QuoteI hate to see you spend heaps of money on a new machine just as I would hate it if it was my money.
There is no option, I have to spend money to buy a new machine. The only machine powerful enough (which I'm talking about with this driver issue) is my home video editing machine. It's not a machine I can actually use in the lab, I was just testing it on there to see what the true requirements were for a new machine.
Targarno don't seem to know what's truly going on in terms of requirements and which ones matter and why, they just specify some basics and say it must meet that as that's what they have tried and that's what happens to work.
I've already discovered that the HD4000 quicksync is probably enough, and is supported by their recommended Youcam 6 software.
IMO they should investigate the NUC platform and the INtel Gen 3 HD cores thoroughly, as this provides a more tightly specific platform spec, and also one that can be physically mounted on the back VESA mount of the required monitor - much more professional.
As it stands at the moment they wouldn't back the NUC solution, as they haven't tried it, and have no clue if it will work. My research so far shows that it should. -
I'll order a new desktop PC tomorrow dedicated for this, no other choice really, going to cost about $850 or so.
This is starting to be a little retarded.
Uncompressed 1080p 60Hz is ~500MB/s so I highly doubt they are doing it raw. Cant they just give you proper drive and capture program? There is zero need to recompress the stream again. Video is probably something around 50Mbit/s max.
have you tried my link?
https://trac.ffmpeg.org/wiki/DirectShow
"-vcodec copy" -
This is starting to be a little retarded.
Uncompressed 1080p 60Hz is ~500MB/s so I highly doubt they are doing it raw. Cant they just give you proper drive and capture program?
They simply say to use Youcam 6, that's it, that's all they know.Quotehave you tried my link?
https://trac.ffmpeg.org/wiki/DirectShow
"-vcodec copy"
Will that mix in audio from a USB mic too? Without that ability, it's useless. -
Quote
have you tried my link?
https://trac.ffmpeg.org/wiki/DirectShow
"-vcodec copy"
Will that mix in audio from a USB mic too? Without that ability, it's useless.
Easily, yes. Or any other audio source up to and including a prerecorded file. -
I tried ffmpeg and it shows the device has a format of yuyv422 1920x1080 @ 59.9402fps
When trying to record using the example command:
ffmpeg -f dshow -i video="Integrated Camera" out.mp4
It says dshow is not a valid format. -
Did you try -vcodec copy, as suggested?
-
Did you try -vcodec copy, as suggested?
Yep, didn't work. "unknown decoder copy" -
Did you try -vcodec copy, as suggested?
Yep, didn't work. "unknown decoder copy"
That is probably bad syntax. Does this thing really enumerate as 'Integrated Camera'?
ffmpeg -f dshow -vcodec copy -i "device name" out.mp4 (whether mp4 is a valid container remains to be seen)
If this fails please paste the entire output of ffmpeg -f dshow -list_options true -i video="device name" -
That is probably bad syntax. Does this thing really enumerate as 'Integrated Camera'?
I am using the correct ID identifier as returned by ffmpeg, which also works with other commands. -
That is probably bad syntax. Does this thing really enumerate as 'Integrated Camera'?
I am using the correct ID identifier as returned by ffmpeg, which also works with other commands.
Right. I'd still like to see the full output so I have a better idea of what I'm looking at.
It is amazingly hard to troubleshoot things otherwise, especially when the last time you used the tool was four years ago on a more consistent platform. -
Wow ... looking at Dave's struggling "just for recording", the Tagarno HD Microscope looking more like a fail product.
Probably they're good and experienced at optical technology, while sucks big time at the electronics part.
-
Wow ... looking at Dave's struggling "just for recording", the Tagarno HD Microscope looking more like a fail product.
You'd have the exact same problem with any 1920x1080x60fps USB3 video source -
Wow ... looking at Dave's struggling "just for recording", the Tagarno HD Microscope looking more like a fail product.
You'd have the exact same problem with any 1920x1080x60fps USB3 video source
No Dave, business sense talking here, not technicality, with that price tag, one should expect it works out of the box, no matter how proprietary hard & software they implemented in there. -
No Dave, business sense talking here, not technicality, with that price tag, one should expect it works out of the box, no matter how proprietary hard & software they implemented in there.
Is does work out of the box, plug monitor in and it works.
As for recording the video output Targarno have no control what PC you buy and use with it, they have a recommendation sheet about what specs you need.
I can go buy a $1000 and that meets the specs and it will work.
There is nothing proprietary in there, it is simply a high end sony camera that acts as USB 3.0 webcam at a fixed 1920x1080 @ 60fps camera. Capturign and encoding that in real-time takes a lot of grunt.
My issue is that I don't think they really understand their recommendations and why they chose them. -
My issue is that I don't think they really understand their recommendations and why they chose them.
Aha ... its clear now, so this product is not designed and thought "carefully" before hand by Tagarno them self to be used for recording.
Say for potential customers that are looking for view + record capabilities, like for instructors or presenter that has to show it live + record the material, I think these crowd should skip Tagarno product until they the maker them self really know clearly how to do that properly.
-
Will that mix in audio from a USB mic too? Without that ability, it's useless.
The proposed virtualdub can do this. Did you try it? Didn't read anything about it. -
Aha ... its clear now, so this product is not designed and thought "carefully" before hand by Tagarno them self to be used for recording.
No, they just simply used a high powered machine and it worked, so bingo, that's what they specify.QuoteSay for potential customers that are looking for view + record capabilities, like for instructors or presenter that has to show it live + record the material, I think these crowd should skip Tagarno product until they the maker them self really know clearly how to do that properly.
No, just get a high end machine that meets their specification, simple.
I could just do that (and that's what they recommend) but I think it's better to understand WHY you need a certain spec, and I would like to use a small NUC style PC, not just some huge thumping gaming desktop machine.
Let's be clear, there is nothing wrong with the Tagarno product, I'm just being an anal retentive trying to figure stuff out instead of spending big $$$$ and be done with it. -
Have you ask Tagarno whether Intel QuickSync is also supported? It just happened it work on your desktop, but if they explicitly say "yes that works too", then go ahead and get any mini PC with Intel QS.
I really think, if they would still specify a gaming graphics card it's a bit lunatic. We rant on about soft power buttons on scopes and they consume a couple of Watts when "off", but I think this is not far off from the same category of "overkill" / they haven't really thought this through.
Also a little comment on my previous post about the Gigabyte BRIX: I see there are several versions from really compact (no 2.5") to a bit bigger with 2.5" and even a i7 4770R + Intel Iris Pro graphics (but according to reviews quite power hungry/noisy machine). -
Have you ask Tagarno whether Intel QuickSync is also supported?
Once again, to clarify, Targno don't have any software, the camera simply appears as a regular HD webcam, so it's up to whatever capture software you use to support QuickSync.
And yes, their recommended Youcam 6 software does support QuickSync, but it seems they didn't know that until I pointed it out to them. They also don't appear to know how well QuickSync works with their product, they can't tell me and hence can't recommend it because they haven't tried it.QuoteI really think, if they would still specify a gaming graphics card it's a bit lunatic. We rant on about soft power buttons on scopes and they consume a couple of Watts when "off", but I think this is not far off from the same category of "overkill" / they haven't really thought this through.
Yes, I'm of the same opinion, hence why I'm being a bit of PITA about it.
I've recommended to them that they help me investigate the NUC type solutions with QuickSync, and that will help both me and their them and their customers.
-
Is does work out of the box, plug monitor in and it works.
A HDMI capture card for the HDMI output of the microscope might be easier and cheaper, if the capture device has integrated H.264 compression. And could be used for other purposes as well.
As for recording the video output Targarno have no control what PC you buy and use with it, they have a recommendation sheet about what specs you need.
I can go buy a $1000 and that meets the specs and it will work.
There is nothing proprietary in there, it is simply a high end sony camera that acts as USB 3.0 webcam at a fixed 1920x1080 @ 60fps camera. Capturign and encoding that in real-time takes a lot of grunt.
My issue is that I don't think they really understand their recommendations and why they chose them. -
They simply say to use Youcam 6, that's it, that's all they know.
Well this right there should be the end of the review, useless $3K of hardware because support is clueless. Maybe tweet them into shame?I tried ffmpeg and it shows the device has a format of yuyv422 1920x1080 @ 59.9402fps
When trying to record using the example command:
ffmpeg -f dshow -i video="Integrated Camera" out.mp4
It says dshow is not a valid format.
arghh Dave, full output?That is probably bad syntax. Does this thing really enumerate as 'Integrated Camera'?
I am using the correct ID identifier as returned by ffmpeg, which also works with other commands.
Right. I'd still like to see the full output so I have a better idea of what I'm looking at.
It is amazingly hard to troubleshoot things otherwise, especially when the last time you used the tool was four years ago on a more consistent platform.
this!! Dave is terrible at helping him troubleshoot because he knows a little about computers
There are 3 types of people when you try to help someone with technical problem
1 complete boobs, they will tell you about cup holder not reading DVDs, ask where any key is, but they will also do everything you ask them to including opening remote desktop session.
3 BOFHs, they might annoy you, but they know whats wrong on their end and usually only ask really tough questions that lead to a fix
2 people in the middle, they will tell you 'they already did that', or 'no way this is going to work so im not gonna bother'
Dave is 2
Dave, copy pasta is your friend, you made a typo.
>This is not a bug. Placement of options is important. Anything before an "-i" is considered an input option, so ffmpeg is attempting to
>apply "-vcodec copy -acodec copy -scodec xsub" to the decoder of your input which is why you get the message, "Unknown decoder
>'copy'". Move appropriate options before your output if you want them applied to the output.
yuyv422 1920x1080 @ 59.9402fps is ~250MB/s
But for starters you dont need to capture 60Hz, its not like YT supports it, so you can capture 30Hz. even laptop will have no trouble encoding that on the fly.
Is yuyv422 the only output available?
-
my magnifier is this kind of thing:
and I love the fact that if I solder underneath it, this glass is between the object and me (and my eyes!). the safety factor really convinced me, and of course, its a magnifier as well.
but all the talk of having an lcd display up on the bench, on a shelf, and a camera that can show a real close-up of what you are doing - that does sound appealing to me.
I have some spare superzoom bridge cameras (that are great for macros and don't have to be right on top of the object) and the older ones have a simple composite video out. you don't even need a pc for that; you can send the 'yellow coax' directly to most video displays. mount the camera on a tripod or an enlarger base (remember those?) and you're in business. I might have to try this.
-
report on the matting I bought from ebay:
I chose this:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/281221031337
and have been quite pleased with it. the seller has been great, too; one of the devices (the banana plug box) was damaged slightly in shipping and they sent me a new one with no hassle at all.
thumbs up for this product and seller.
btw, the blue is a very light blue color, not at all dark. it cheers up the workroom a bit