03-23-2004, 11:36 PM
|
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 122
|
|
|
Getting the best cam pics?
I use (well, have to buy another) QuickcamPro 4000, but the pics always come out a bit fuzzy and dulled, instead of almost photo-like. Is there another program I should use with it or instead of just the record feature right through the cam "console" thingy? I'd like to get some better pics. Any info would be appreciated  |
03-24-2004, 01:32 AM
|
 |
Multi-Sexual
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Michigan
Posts: 1,244
|
|
|
Fuzzy pictures are more often a product of the camera itself, rather than which programs you use. However, that aside, making the pic smaller will make it appear less fuzzy. In my experiance with digi cams, cheap ones, and even most midrange ones are not worth the money, because the pics are horrible.
|
03-24-2004, 03:11 AM
|
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 122
|
|
|
Any particular cameras you would recommend?
|
03-24-2004, 08:27 AM
|
 |
Member
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: WiscUSA
Posts: 49
|
|
|
Keep fussing with the settings on the Quickcam 4000. It gets good marks. You might also try flooding the image with what seems to be way too much light. Try a halogen hot shop light or two to fill in all the portrait you are attempting. Aim for even full illumination. You can get the ten dollar lights at walmart, or home depot.
No web cam will ever match the clarity of an upscale camera, but adding gobs of light sure helps bridge the gap.
Good Luck !
|
03-24-2004, 09:57 AM
|
 |
Explorer of the deep
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 110
|
|
|
For digital pics, daylight almost almost seems to be much superior to artificial light sources.
|
03-24-2004, 01:08 PM
|
|
Multi-Sexual
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Michigan
Posts: 1,244
|
|
|
The one I use is a sony, but I'm not sure what model. We borrow it from my husbands office at the college, and I know when they got them in, they paid around 1600 each. It takes pictures that are are crisp and clear, as well as 25 second mpg video's.
I've been spoiled by it, and wouldn't buy anything less now.
|
03-24-2004, 01:11 PM
|
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 122
|
|
Sounds great... but 1600 is just a bit out of my range 
Plus, the QuickCam I used took really long vids of decent quality... just wan't a little better quality with pics/vids. |
03-24-2004, 01:22 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: WiscUSA
Posts: 49
|
|
|
No argument
Quote:
Originally posted by XX-Access
For digital pics, daylight almost almost seems to be much superior to artificial light sources.
|
Full natural daylight is always best. Yet, for those evening hours of inspiration some sort of supplement seems in order. Hence the cheap Home Depot grade hot (very hot) halogen lights enter the picture. |
03-24-2004, 09:10 PM
|
|
Multi-Sexual
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Michigan
Posts: 1,244
|
|
Quote:
Originally posted by always_horny
Sounds great... but 1600 is just a bit out of my range
Plus, the QuickCam I used took really long vids of decent quality... just wan't a little better quality with pics/vids.
|
-grins- no shit, which is why I'm content borrowing theirs. |
| Thread Tools |
Search this Thread |
|
|
|
| Display Modes |
Rate This Thread |
 Linear Mode
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:31 PM.
|
