Composite Video to USB with Quality Streaming

[bionicbone]

I have a project with a difference, most people on here need to convert videos to digital formats.

I need to mount a camera remotely and stream video back to a USB device on a laptop that is capably of zooming into text and displaying it clearly.

However, I'm hitting a problem, basically the Composite to USB converter (very cheap one) makes "text" look garbage when displayed on the laptop.

I've spent days completing tests to see what part of my project causes the distortion, for example:

Connect the Mobius Camera via built in USB to Laptop, zoom in on text from 1000mm, press shutter button, Perfect Picture on laptop using basic Win10 Camera application.
Connect the Mobius Camera via FPV USB lead to Composite input on TV, zoom in on text from 1000mm, Perfect Picture on TV.
Connect the Mobius Camera via FPV USB lead to 5.8Ghz video transmitter. Connect Video Receiver to Composite input on TV, zoom in on text from 1000mm, Near Perfect Picture on TV.
Connect the Mobius Camera via FPV USB lead to 5.8Ghz video transmitter. Connect Video Receiver to Composite input on my "cheap" USB converter and the picture is shocking, blocks not text!

The converter seems to be missing lines, as I move the camera the letters become distorted in different ways.

The driver used is the same whether I connect the Mobius to the PC or the Cheap USB converter so that is not the issue.

At this stage I can only think I need a better Composite to USB converter, but which one is as good as the one built into the Mobius Camera?

Any Ideas?

Kev

[Brad]

I'm very confused as to what you're doing, but regarding small details fed via composite video, especially to a cheap capture device: expect them to look like trash. The signal you're capturing is 576 lines tall, split into two 288-line images that update separately every 1/50 sec if there is any movement. 95% of capture devices also do a poor to mediocre job separating a composite signal into component video, as required for display.

Images would help, to know exactly the problems you're encountering. Maybe your complaint is simply interlacing. This forum has an Upload Image button.

[bionicbone]

Hi Thanks for the reply

It would be worth pointing out that I'm new to this and maybe all Analogue to USB converters (how ever expensive) would suffer from the same issue. If thats true though, why is the picture so clear when I connect the Mobius camera using the built in USB out direct to the Laptop?

I have attached some pictures, 1 example of what I am trying to do, 2 picture from the Mobius when connected to Laptop, 3 picture when using my cheap USB converter.

Like i said above, all my tests point at the Converter being the cause of the picture degradation and not the Video transmission like I first thought it would be.

Ultimately, I dont what to buy another converter if basically they are all the same

Thanks
Kev

[Brad]

maybe all Analogue to USB converters (how ever expensive) would suffer from the same issue. If thats true though, why is the picture so clear when I connect the Mobius camera using the built in USB out direct to the Laptop?

The direct USB connection isn't limited to any analog video standard.

I think it's still doable with your current hardware, depending upon:

1. Can the camera remain stationary while you want to read the text?
2. Can you use alternative software to view the composite-to-USB feed? i.e. AmaRecTV

[bionicbone]

Stationary, not sure it will be perfect, I still have to test that. Imagine a camera on a fork truck, I imagine a slight wobble. The camera will be used to visually check stock in a high up position to ensure an auditor can remain in the ground and in a safe position from the working zone. The goal is to limit the number of pallets required to be retrieved from storage to be visually inspected.

Alternative software, I used Win10 Camera app on both tests and noticed excellent results from the Camera with built in USB function so I eliminated the software and drivers since in both tests the driver used was the same. I have just downloaded the AmaRecTV app but I dont seem to get a picture. the connection seems OK but get 0 fps. I can get audio. It also does not work with my built in webcam on the laptop so maybe I am doing something wrong? I did install the codec.

I tried all the resolutions show in the picture, I seem to get an error "Aspect none. Underscan" on some resolutions, other give me "Aspect Fix Windowif that means anything.

EDIT: I'll point out that I checked the camera was sending a signal using the Win10 app

EDIT2: I realised I have never actually said which Converter I am using
USB Converter

Kev

[raffriff42]

I gather FPV (First Person View) drone cameras with analog radio links (which I think is what you are talking about) intentionally sacrifice quality for low latency, needed to allow you to fly through obstacles etc.

If you need super high quality you should set up a second digital-only radio link that bypasses all that horrible conversion -- or else drop the analog link and switch to digital-only, accepting higher latency.

Getting a better composite->USB converter will help, but it will never be as good as an all-digital link.

To sum up, as I understand it:

Camera -> USB -> Laptop
    "Perfect Picture"

Camera -> USB -> Converter #1 -> Composite -> TV
    "Perfect Picture" (added interlace artifacts & chroma bleed etc)

Camera -> USB -> Converter #1 -> Composite -> TX -> 5.8Ghz -> RX -> Composite -> TV
    "Near Perfect Picture" (added noise, interference, ghosts, fading)

Camera -> USB -> Converter #1 -> Composite -> TX -> 5.8Ghz -> RX -> Composite -> "Cheap" Converter #2 -> USB
    "picture is shocking, blocks not text!" (no kidding)

Camera -> USB -> TX -> 4G telcom -> RX -> USB (hypothetical second radio link)
    Probably Perfect Picture with slight delay

[bionicbone]

@raffriff42

Just for reference, the Mobius is a very good camera, not really for FPV (meaning to fly by that view) although the 5.8Ghz link is designed for FPV.

The thing is, I don't think this is the issue since some tests give the almost the same results over the 5.8 Ghz (which would be more than acceptable for my purpose)

So why would you not just use a TV / Monitor and forget the laptop I hear , Answer: to be able to capture screen shots and add to documentation etc.

I read a review and these two devices came out best for quality of picture conversion, what do you think?
Diamond-Multimedia-VC500-Capture-Device
Roxio-Easy-VHS-DVD-Plus

These are not so expensive, but they are if the results are the same LOL.

I'm a bit more concerned now about the interlacing, that looks like what I am seeing on the PC screen!

My converter is based on the UTV630 Chipset, I'm trying to find out what the above are based on.

EDIT: Thought I'd point out that I'm using a lens to zoom not digital

Kev

[Brad]

Alternative software, I used Win10 Camera app on both tests and noticed excellent results from the Camera with built in USB function so I eliminated the software and drivers since in both tests the driver used was the same.

The camera's built-in USB video is likely a progressive format rather than interlaced. The software/drivers could easily have poor display for interlaced and fine display for the simpler progressive format.

I have just downloaded the AmaRecTV app but I dont seem to get a picture. the connection seems OK but get 0 fps. I can get audio. It also does not work with my built in webcam on the laptop so maybe I am doing something wrong? I did install the codec.

You don't need to install the codec, so feel free to uninstall it even if you do keep the app.

Looking at your AmaRecTV results, I'm confused.

1. It appears to spit out only compressed MJPEG with no option for uncompressed. I was under the impression that all Easycaps only offer uncompressed. This will limit the quality of video capture, depending on the degree of compression imposed. The actual "Preview pin" you view in realtime may nevertheless be uncompressed, but maybe not.
2. You've got 288 line rates but no accompanying 50Hz option, just 60/30. And a 480 option but no 576. Which did you select in the "basic Win10 Camera application"? (I'm not familiar with the app.)
3. The listing you linked claims, "With USB 2.0 connection: the output resolution will be full-screen DVD video resolution up to 720x480 at 30 fps for NTSC and 720 x 576 at 25 fps for PAL." Which is wrong not just because of the lack of 576/25/50: the max you're getting horizontally is 640, not 720.

Maybe try installing the driver linked from that page, though I would be wary of mucking things up further.

I read a review and these two devices came out best for quality of picture conversion, what do you think?
Diamond-Multimedia-VC500-Capture-Device
Roxio-Easy-VHS-DVD-Plus

I own the VC500. It's a poor choice for composite capture, even though I recommend it for S-Video.

The Roxio probably isn't substantially better than your Easycap, if it can be made to capture proper PAL rates.

[jagabo]

It looks like you're starting with a good quality 1920x1080 camera, then reducing that to 720x576 or 720x480 using the FPV converter, reducing that further to maybe 500x576 or 500x480 using the RF modulator. Finally, the image in post #5 shows you're capturing at 352x288, even more loss of resolution. So of course the picture looks like crap. At least step the capture up to 640x480. Any half decent capture device would allow 720x480 at 30 fps, or 720x576 at 25 fps, both interlaced. I suspect your capture device is deinterlacing -- so you're losing half the vertical resolution too (certainly at 288 lines it is).

[Brad]

the image in post #5 shows you're capturing at 352x288

That was actually a failed attempt to capture. We still don't know yet what he is capturing/previewing at.

Since I didn't bother to google Mobius Camera until now, I just saw that the TV Out is switchable between PAL & NTSC. PAL would be (much) better for this purpose.

[bionicbone]

I am using PAL 16:9

I did try all the different resolution settings, 1920 x 1080, 1280 x 720, 848 x 480, basically messed with all the different setting except NTSC

Webcam mode is in H.264 + audio, maybe I should put back to MJPG?

I'm getting the feeling I'm not going to salve this...

Kev

[bionicbone]

I tried NTSC and MJPG, NTSC just makes the colours go washed out in Win10-Carmera App, MJPG does nothing. Both still dont work in the AmaRec app.

Win10 Camera app has no settings for watching, only for recording.

Jagabo could be right about deinterlacing given the letters seem to miss horizontal lines. G can look like C, move the camera up a bit and its like a squashed G but you can see the middle line.

Really annoying LOL.

Kev

[jagabo]

You can easily verify deinterlacing by using shooting something with vertical lines. Move the target left/right and watch for comb artifacts.

[bionicbone]

I'll give that a go.

I'm also going to redo the TV test, I'm starting to think I'm going mad now LOL

I noticed that if I'm close enough to the text <600mm and zoomed in (x12) then the issue is not as noticeable. So I should check the TV again just in case since it could be what was said earlier about FPV (i.e. the camera entering an FPV resolution when I make it output the composite feed rather than the digital USB feed).

If it is then I need to test a different type of camera, probably a standard camcorder over my 5.8 Ghz

On a positive note, my 5.8 Ghz diversity circuit is getting much better

Kev

[Brad]

Apparently VirtualDub supports capture using MJPG hardware. Try that.

If you test with TV Out set to NTSC, you may also need to manually set NTSC on the capture device through its Capture Filter dialog to get proper colors. And you should use 480 height in that case.

[davexnet]

sorry wrong thread

[bionicbone]

Hi everyone,

I just wanted to nip back and thank you guys for your help last weekend.

I did retest the Camera AV out, through 5.8GHz video link, into the TV again and confirmed the picture was OK (basically I think proving the AV signal was clear enough into the cheap USB Converter, leaving just the Converter or the software / driver that must be introducing the poor quality). I've attached photo's of the screen (its the best I can do), the image name being the distance from the picture.

@vaporeon800 I tried the VitrualDub, however it does not seem to make any difference. Its is worth pointing out that VirtualDub can only preview the picture at 2fps, where as Windows 10 Camera App has a little lag but nothing like VirtualDub.

A couple of videos so you can see what is happening
Win10 App Recording
VirtualDub Recording

I'm still working on the problem being something to do with the USB converter at the moment, however since I still have no suggestion that any other converter would do a better job I'm a bit stuck.

Kev

[bionicbone]

Interesting results, I thought I'd try a few other cameras.

Sony_600TVL
HS1177_600TVL
Kylin_800TVL
eMachine_1000TVL

All of these don't suffer from the same issue, with the Kylin 800TVL being the best. Is this down to camera settings, resolution or TVL, does anyone have an explanation / best guess?

Kev

[bionicbone]

I managed to get "roxio easy vhs to dvd 3 plus" for £20 second hand on ebay so when that arrives I'll do similar tests
Kev

[Brad]

YouTube's bad conversion to 480p makes it tough to tell what's going on. Guess we can just wait on the Roxio. It will at least output uncompressed video that AmaRecTV and VirtualDub can both deal with.

[dellsam34]

I managed to get "roxio easy vhs to dvd 3 plus" for £20 second hand on ebay so when that arrives I'll do similar tests
Kev

You could have bought a WiFi HD camera like this and access it with a computer/tablet/phone using any internet browser. You could attach a battery pack and make it completely autonomous.

[bionicbone]

Thanks for your input.

Unfortunately, because of I.S. security we would not be allowed to connect a device such as this to the company network.

I'd be interested to know if it's possible to create a 1:1 connection though, I. E. Laptop to camera without a router / access point involved, do you know if that is possible?

Kev

[jagabo]

Wired ethernet or USB camera connected directly to the laptop.

[bionicbone]

I need to use a system that allows the auditor to view the stock (pallet ID number, material and batch) from a distance, no wires for safety reasons.

To be fair, the 5.8GHz video transmission system seems fit for purpose here. I beleive that the converter that takes that AV signal into the USB port is the issue.

I know that youtube has compressed the videos more, but in fact they look similar to what I'm seeing on the laptop screen, basically a very blocky video and not clear like it would be if I plugged the AV direct to the TV.

Kev

[raffriff42]

Unfortunately, because of I.S. security we would not be allowed to connect a device such as this to the company network.

I believe you can set up an "ad hoc peer to peer network" consisting of only the camera and your laptop.
https://www.google.com/search?q=setup+ad+hoc+network+windows+10
https://www.lifewire.com/set-up-an-ad-hoc-peer-wifi-network-818272

[dellsam34]

Thanks for your input.

Unfortunately, because of I.S. security we would not be allowed to connect a device such as this to the company network.

I'd be interested to know if it's possible to create a 1:1 connection though, I. E. Laptop to camera without a router / access point involved, do you know if that is possible?

Kev

I'm not sure but I believe you can connect to the camera using a wifi capable device such as a laptop, for that you will have to disconnect from the company network and connect to the camera, this may be inconvenient if you need the laptop connected to the internet. You can email the sellers of those cameras.

[Brad]

My converter is based on the UTV630 Chipset

Dutch page that provides a rundown of various Easycap chipsets and the guy's experiences with them.

Easycaps with an XYUSB01 / 02 chipset Video:
This is a kind of webcam chip that broadcasts a MJPG (Motion JPEG) stream with a resolution of 640 × 480 pixels and a variable frame rate up to 60 frames per second and default about 25 frames per second. Probably progressive scan, so your video is already directly interlaced at the input: the vertical resolution is halved, and then the remaining lines are duplicated randomly to restore the aspect ratio. As a result, diagonal lines may seem rough and the image is generally less sharp.

Russian page that seems to indicate the UVC / "webcam" Easycaps are all equivalent.

3. Easycap standard UVC
- Single chip (Happens on chips XYUSB01, XYUSB02 and AMT-630 ... it is possible and still is ...)
- VID & PID [18EC: 5850]
> The software is used differently, both for webcams ... for example UsbWeb

Seems to explain the issues you've had.