ZoneMinder Forums

Hi.

Has anyone ever tried this project? http://www.lavrsen.dk/twiki/bin/view/Motion/WebHome

They have several nice patches supplied, for example: http://www.lavrsen.dk/twiki/bin/view/Motion/XvidCodec - which saves the video in Xvid, rather then in MPEG, or this one: http://www.lavrsen.dk/twiki/bin/view/Mo ... nvertTo3gp, which converts the video to 3GP format, to stream it to the mobile phones.

Perhaps we can borrow some ideas from them?

you dont half find some stuff you dont you. In a way im glad i cant write software....

I've heard of Motion but not used it or looked at the code. Mostly because I want to make sure that ZM is as clean as possible, but partly because I like writing stuff from scratch!

Do you know if ffmpeg supports xVid? If so then it should be a relatively simple matter of getting output in that format. I do have a version of ZM with 3gp support already but it works via the ffmpeg command line and I've not managed to get streaming directly to 3gp format working quite yet. I'm sure it's something trivial and when I have time to spend on it I'll try and crack that nut so I can release it.

Phil

i have mentioned this before but cant find where i mentioned it but this project have found a way to use ffmpeg to deinterlace the combing effect so it can be captured at full res.
http://www.lavrsen.dk/twiki/bin/view/Mo ... einterlace

seems its turned in on the config file.
SO can we add this to zm i presume the capture is taken from ffmpeg or could we use motion on the same machine and purly use it to get de interlace 720x576 grabs for feeding into zm?

You can set this up in ffmpeg options under the Images tab:
ZM_FFMPEG_INPUT_OPTIONS -deinterlace

Regards,
Corey

I tried motion and use it more or less on my desktop pc to play around. it's great and just what you need to play around with your webcam. I didn't know that there's an xvid-patch out there which is quite cool. What sucks on motion is the convertion to videos actually don't work very well. Either the pictures are too slow or too fast and ffmpeg doesn't seem to be able to handle cpu frequency right. But despite that, it's a nice tool.

oh right... lol
so this will allow us to capture at 640*480 without combing

i though t it was input options when creating mpeg movies of an event

no i have tested and doesnt make any diffenence to the jpeg grabs.

this is a better description
http://www.lavrsen.dk/twiki/bin/view/Mo ... einterlace

jameswilson wrote:oh right... lol
so this will allow us to capture at 640*480 without combing
i though t it was input options when creating mpeg movies of an event

500000 cm/hour / 3600sec / 60 = 2.3148 cm (Your eyes will be longer for NTSC)
OR
500000 cm/hour / 3600sec / 50 = 2.7777 cm (Your eyes will be longer for PAL)

Regards

im sorry i havnt a clue what that means

jameswilson wrote:im sorry i havnt a clue what that means

5 kilometers per hour men speed
NTSC 30 frames per second or 60 fields per second.
Each full frame - 2 fields (even and odd).
So distance for 1/60 seconds will be 2.3148 cm
Regards
Andrew

Oh i see, thankyou a technical answer to the problem. Are you sayiing then there is nothing that can be done?

jameswilson wrote: Are you sayiing then there is nothing that can be done?

This is YOUR decision
If YOU can live with images imaginered (thought up) by a programm use 640x480 and interlaced cameras for NTSC or 768x576 for PAL.
Otherwise, use cameras with a progressive scan.
Regards.
Andrew

i do agree but the majority of cctv cameras especailly the older stuff is all intelaced. I have never tried a progressive scan camera does this not occur then?

jameswilson wrote:I have never tried a progressive scan camera does this not occur then?

I have never tried a progressive scan camera too. But with progressive scan 1frame=1field with full resolution.
So there are no places where combing can occur.
( Disclaimer: The above is pure theory and may work on a good day with the wind behind it. etc etc.)
Regards.
Andrew