| Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format |
| Unofficial VirtualDub Support Forums > Capture > Frame Rates |
| Posted by: darwin-t Dec 28 2009, 03:20 AM |
| I've been using VirtualDub with webcams attached to my telescope. I just got a new camera and it hasn't worked out well yet. At first VirtualDub crashed when I tried to record. I just downloaded the newest version and get this error message "Cannot begin capture because the capture device has no associated frame rate (variable frame rate). This is not currently supported." While looking around in the program I saw a setting about frame rate - it is set at 1.#INF. Is it possible to set the frame rate with this setting? I have also written to the camera manufacturer and asked them if it's possible to set the camera's frame rate some other way. Here's the camera: http://www.opticstar-ccd.com/Run/AS/AS-Imagers-OS.asp?p=0_10_0_50_87 My main interest is capturing video of the International Space Station (ISS) as it passes over and stacking frames to make photos. I don't remember setting the frame rate on my other cams..... Thanks. |
| Posted by: rjisinspired Dec 28 2009, 09:48 PM |
| By clicking on the frame rate value at the bottom of the capture window, a drop-down should present more options for frame rates. I saw the frame rates and resolutions specs for camera you posted. I'm a bit curious on how huge resolutions can be possible through USB. I only have experience with standard definition cameras and the resolutions are usually limited through the USB port bus and resolutions fall down to 320X240 or 360X240. I would like to know how that camera manages to pull higher resolutions off? Telescope photography is interesting to me too. I have never done it but I'm blown away by a lot of imagery that is out there. |
| Posted by: phaeron Dec 29 2009, 09:40 PM |
| VirtualDub's capture mode doesn't currently cope with video capture devices that simply don't report a frame rate. |
| Posted by: darwin-t Dec 30 2009, 07:11 PM |
| Thanks, phaeron. I wrote to the camera company, but they weren't much help. I'll tell them this, maybe it would be a simple fix for them to do. rjisinspired, They use USB 2 to get the frame rates they do for full resolution - they say up to 22 fps, I got more than that on my computer. They also give you the option of using only the center of the frame - either 640 x 480 or 320 x 240 and download only that small portion of the frame. This is handy for photographing planets - which usually take up a pretty small part frame. The more frames you get, the more you can stack to sharpen the image and bring out the most detail as possible. I need the whole chip at full resolution. It's pretty hard to keep the ISS "on the chip" even when using software to track it. Here is my page of what I've done so far. I hope to do much better with my new camera. http://darwinsastroworld.com/ISS2.htm |
| Posted by: rjisinspired Dec 30 2009, 11:28 PM |
| Registax is a nice program. I used it years ago, for nonspace imaging though. How far can your scope reach? I remember seeing some examples of Jupiter a while back and this was a challenge for some. That scope at La salle Chile would be nice to have. Not sure how it's telescopic properties are but that particular one was used to gather data on Gliese 581 early last year. This is what got me interested more in astronomy though I hadn't gotten heavy into it. Gliese 581C is believed to be an earth-like planet. Same temperatures as earth but 50% larger in diameter and 2.5X the gravity. Gliese's sun is much closer to this planet but it is cooler than ours. One year there is only 13 days. I would suspect that if anything could be viewable there it would be like looking back in the past. At 20.5 light years away that would be a hell of a long trip by today's standards of travel. That about a little over 120 something trillion miles, yikes! If life did exist there it makes me wonder what type and if at all human or alien. Taking into account for gravity; living beings would have to be much shorter and maybe pudgier. Houses there would be small with wider door entrances probably. Be neat if light speed travel could ever become possible so as to travel to that place but then it would be a shame when you get there if nothing existed there or the planet doesn't exist anymore. That's 41 light years both ways. Talk about wasting time. |