Train Cam

[SirTainly]

I know some of you folks have built pretty impress train cams using the 2.4ghz stuff, but I was looking at doing something that was easier to put onto a PC, didn't require a TV set (which brings up PAL vs NTSC issues) and was cheap. I was thinking of mounting something like this:

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/CAR-REMOTE-KEY-Mini-DV-DVR-Webcam-Video-Camera-Spy-cam_W0QQitemZ300394296345QQcmdZViewItemQQptZUK_CCTV?hash=item45f0e53419

on a flat car, any thoughts?

I was leaning towards using a 2 axle chassis to try and avoid the lurch around corner problems I've seen on some videos.

[Zox]

I know some of you folks have built pretty impress train cams using the 2.4ghz stuff, but I was looking at doing something that was easier to put onto a PC, didn't require a TV set (which brings up PAL vs NTSC issues) and was cheap. I was thinking of mounting something like this:

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/CAR-REMOTE-KEY-Mini-DV-DVR-Webcam-Video-Camera-Spy-cam_W0QQitemZ300394296345QQcmdZViewItemQQptZUK_CCTV?hash=item45f0e53419

on a flat car, any thoughts?

I was leaning towards using a 2 axle chassis to try and avoid the lurch around corner problems I've seen on some videos.

For that price, I'd say go for it!

I've looked at the notion of doing an onboard recorder to avoid the radio interference issues I've experienced with my camera car, but this one is smaller and less expensive than any of the options I've seen before. (Also, my car's largely for entertainment at train shows, which requires a realtime broadcast.)

Please keep us updated--I for one will be fascinated to see what you do with this.

As for the two-axle chassis, one of my early camera-car experiments was with a leading "bobber" truck:



...and it had a pretty severe side-to-side shimmy:

http://lordzox.com/mrr/camcar1.mov (3.3MB Quicktime movie).

Granted, the effect was probably somewhat magnified by the camera-articulation mechanism, but it's something to watch out for.

[DKS]

I bought the "chewing gum pack" version of this cam, and while you lose the interference that plagues the wireless cams, you also lose resolution and frame rate. They look like a freebie web cam--grainy, jerky images, with lots of blooming and smearing; they don't like things that move a lot. After a quick test, I didn't even bother attaching it to a car; in spite of their interference, the railcams I'd built before were all far better in terms of basic picture quality.

That said, for the price, it's certainly worth experimenting; they may have been improved.

Here's a contradiction in terms:

High resolution image with 2000k pixels

[Zox]

Here's a contradiction in terms:

High resolution image with 2000k pixels

2,000,000 ("2000k") pixels? Actually, I'd say that unrealistically good for video. 720x480 (the advertised resolution of the key fob) is only about 346,000 pixels. I'm guessing the device has a 2 megapixel still-camera mode as well as the video mode.

As for the video quality, the wireless security cameras I've used for my camera car are only 320x240x30fps. That's about the same resolution as VHS video.

They look like a freebie web cam--grainy, jerky images, with lots of blooming and smearing; they don't like things that move a lot.

I suspect that's more an issue with the recorder part of the device than with the camera. With a wireless setup, you can do the digital video encoding in a separate (more expensive and much larger) device.

Shoehorning a video encoder into a keychain or a pack of gum is pretty much a technical miracle; expecting it to work well for under 15 bucks is asking an awful lot.

[DKS]

I'm guessing the device has a 2 megapixel still-camera mode as well as the video mode.

That's exactly how my gum stick cam worked. It had two modes, and IIRC, the still images were supposed to be ~2MP. The video mode resolution seemed comparable to the wireless cam.

Shoehorning a video encoder into a keychain or a pack of gum is pretty much a technical miracle; expecting it to work well for under 15 bucks is asking an awful lot.

No arguments there! The fact that it works at all was pretty amazing to me. Still, owing mostly to what looked like 15fps video (in spite of the specs), I wound up tossing the cam in a drawer. The wireless cam images still look a better, IMO.

[up1950s]

Could be good to put on a stick to poke behind heavy things when you are trying to find a trouble or missing part . Then download to see if you actually have to get in that spot . It has its uses as a tool !

[bicknell]

Mine is one of the 1.2Ghz ones, but it's small and decent quality if there is no interference.



Big hit at train shows.

[SquirrelHollow]

It says it can handle up to a 16GB Micro SD card, but I really don't believe it.

Support Micro SD (TF) card: 1GB/2GB/4GB/8GB/16GB(max.)

I have many devices in my house, that use Micro SD...  Not one of them will recognize a card bigger than 8GB; even while some of them claim to handle something larger.  (My wife's last cell phone was a good example of a grey area.  It would recognize anything up to 4GB {8GB claimed}, but could only read and write 1GB of any given card.)  Until you have a chance to test it; don't go too expensive, when you buy a card.

[SirTainly]

Thanks for the replies, I've taken note of the fact that quality might be piss-poor. I'm going to use this as a learning experience and may later build one one using a 2.4Ghz system, once my requirements for both 120/240V transformers and PAL and NTSC output have settled oneway or the other.

Today I picked up a small German car from the secondhand shop here in town which whilst not exactly what I was after might give me some better options on mounting the camera.

[DKS]

You gotta love the Engrish on these products...
 


Similar stuff here: http://www.engrish.com/

[SirTainly]

Just got a deal on a 1.2Ghz battery powered set for only a few pounds more than the keyfob camera, and since it's all running off 9v batteries no need to worry about 110 and 240V transformers. I went for NTSC as I know most UK TVs can display that as a secondary input, but most NA ones don't do PAL as well. Now to work out how to connect the receiver to my laptop and I'm sorted.

Not quite as ground breaking but more likely to get viewable results.

[Zox]

It's not a direct connection to a computer, but this is my favored technology for recording the output from my camera:

http://www.amazon.com/Neuros-MPEG-4-Recorder-Digital-Video/dp/B000COYZR8/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=videogames&qid=1266093335&sr=8-1

They have 'em listed under "Outlet" behind the "4 new" link, for under $50.

It records to CF or SD (not SDHC) cards up to 2GB, which means each card can hold about two hours of 640x480x30fps video.

[Walkercolt]

I've built several RF train cams (from 900Mhz to 5.6Ghz) from cameras and transmitters/recievers I've gotten from various electronic surplus houses, all for under $75. Most will do both PAL and NTSC/ATSC. They were all 9 volt battery eaters until the new NiMH 9.4volt rechargeables came out. I've played with some Li-PO's, but thier price is still too high compared to the NiMH's and the chargers. The last 5.6GHz units I got had as good of video quality as most standard def TV's will handle(480 lines/60Hz), but all of them need a well lit layout for good picture quality. (50 LUX or better for the techies, lighting about equal to the average office ie: F5.6 @1/60 sec with ISO 400 film.) The price drops everytime they change frequencies and/or TV standards. Many come installed in a clock or a picture frame as "nanny cams" or "employee-cams".

[SirTainly]

Rob, that recorder could be useful, I'll look into those.

Walkercolt, yes the deal I got was $23 delivered (old stock clearance I think) and was billed as a nanny cam but looks like the little black cubed one that seems popular.