Home › Forums › Archives › Computer Support › Web Cams › Best IM for Webcam?
- This topic has 9 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 5 months ago by mk.
-
AuthorPosts
-
September 18, 2003 at 5:55 am #12241jazeeMember
I just got a webcam (Logitech 3000, lucky to still find one, picture quality is better than 4000.) I’ve tried MSN IM 6.0, Yahoo, and Sightspeed. As with everything I research, I’ve found no product covers all the important features (for me) well.
MSN IM 6.0 – Pros: great picture quality and very smooth motion (I have a cable connection) Cons: Can’t magnify picture, can’t connect allow people to connect to my webcam without my granting them permission each time (as far as I can tell). Can someone on Win98 use a version of Messenger that can still see my webcam?
Yahoo Messenger – Pros: can allow people to connect without giving permission each time, can resize window to 100%, 200%, full screen. Cons: Picture quality and motion is noticeably lower quality than MSN 6.0 (if you go into settings and slide the slider about 2/3 to the left for better quality versus speed you get closer to MSN 6.0 quality but the motion is much jerkier and you have to be in “Super Webcam Mode”
Sightspeed – What a joke. They show a full screen video on their website, it’s actually a tiny window and you can’t resize it.
Here’s what I want. I’m really not an IM user. I’d never get any work done if I was. Speech (via telephone or in person) is much more efficient for communication than typing. (I can see the use of voice chat in IM to avoid LD bills but that ain’t a big deal anymore now with free LD on all the cell phones). Enough said – you know where I’m coming from. What I want to use it for is two things: 1) Virtual event participation – Lots of relatives live far away. I’d like to turn the webcam on so they can watch *and* hear our kid’s birthday parties while at the same time give the option of anyone at the party can go up to the computer (a wireless notebook in our family room) and type a message to them (they will most likely not have a web cam – yet and some will not be on Win XP). 2) When my wife and I go on vacation, it would be nice to be able to ocassionally (infrequently) login and take a peek inside the house to see/hear how things are going without having to hace the babysitter money with the computer or accept the webcam invitation or whatever.
All this with the best quality possible.
Any recommendations? The http://www.anywebcam.com site looks promising. Haven’t tried it yet but it appears they don’t have simultaneous text chat. I guess Yahoo Messenger fits the bill but I really hate knowing the image quality is inferior to MSN 6.0.
September 18, 2003 at 7:39 am #90392FrutZleMemberMSN Messenger 6 does allow for resizing the webcam image. Just click on the little arrow below the webcam image and choose size (small, medium or large).
With that out of the way, I recommend getting a program that’ll automatically upload images to a webpage using FTP, or one that will run a virtual HTTP server on your computer and store the images there. Then when you’re on vacation, you can go to the webpage or your computer’s IP address and see images from your webcam (they could refresh every X seconds). IMO that’s the easiest solution when you don’t require sound and streaming images.
Then if you do want to hear what’s going on, or if you do want streaming images, just make a call home and tell whoever’s there to log on to MSN Messenger (getting a seperate cam for that would be easiest unless you trust they will turn off the FTP software before they turn the cam on on MSN, and then will turn the FTP software back on after the chat is over).Also, there is software around that will run a virtual HTTP server on your computer and by using a Java Applet allow semi-streaming images to be broadcast. It most likely won’t be as smooth as when you use MSN Messenger, but just like with FTP images, you can take a look at any time you want without bothering anyone.
I have both a QuickCam Pro 3000 and a QuickCam Pro 4000, and really can’t say the 3000 has better image quality than the 4000. In fact, it’s quite the opposite since the QC3000’s images often turn out grainy where the QC4000’s images turn out bright and smooth.
September 18, 2003 at 4:17 pm #90395jazeeMemberMSN doesn’t let you enlarge the image beyond 100%. ‘Large’ isn’t that large, especially on these newer LCD hi-res monitors where your screen is 1280×1024 or 1600×1280 (on my notebook) – the window is tiny! Granted the picture quality isn’t that great when you magnify by 200% but it is a nice option to have, especially if you are sitting back from the monitor. I really don’t like the fact on MSN you can’t set it up where people can just click in ‘watch my webcam’ without having to grant permission each time. Maybe for events all use MSN and for monitoring purposes I’ll use Yahoo.
September 18, 2003 at 10:32 pm #90388Jeff HesterKeymasterI think as Frutzle suggested, for remote monitoring without prompts for permission you’d be better off using a web cam software that does streaming video. Check out Argus Webcam from 545 Studios, CoffeeCup Webcam, or ConquerCam (which I’m using for Cam 1 on our own webcam page.
Note that I don’t do streaming; I update a static image once every 30 seconds. But I’ve used all three of these programs and they will all support streaming.
September 19, 2003 at 12:11 am #90391FrutZleMemberArgus is great and cheap, I’ll grant you that (thanks for the tip Jeff, I downloaded it a while ago)
I use webcamXP when I turn on both my webcams at the same time (either FTP-image upload or using a Flash viewer interfact on my site), that way I’ll only have to run one program. Also the overlay editor there is way superior to that of Argus, but you get what you pay for…Although I do like the idea of not everyone being able to just jump in and view my webcam, I also agree that it often does become annoying when you have to invite someone each time you want them to view your cam. A link that people could click to automatically view your cam when it’s on (like what Yahoo has, including the “always allow list”) would indeed be a great feature.
Also, you’re right about the webcam image not being large enough, at least not by default. At work I have a notebook with the monitor resolution set to 1600×1200 and there the image does indeed stay too small even when it’s set to large, while on Yahoo I always “zoom” the view. At home the “small” size doesn’t bother me much because my monitor is set to a lower resolution (1280×1024) and everything already seems big compared to my monitor at work 🙂
One thing I forgot to mention in my first reply: using FTP instead of streaming, such as with an IM, can also reduce on bandwidth consumption. So if you have to keep that in line due to restrictions from your ISP, you might want to consider going with one of the programs Jeff and I wrote about.
Good luck, and let us know what you’ve decided to go with 🙂
September 19, 2003 at 12:47 am #90394jazeeMemberI’d prefer to use one solution. And with one of my requirements being simultaneous audio broadcast with the video and optional text chat, that rules Argus and many other solutions out I think. I think I’m going to settle with MSN Messenger 6 for events where approving a viewer or two is no big deal. And then when I’m away, I’ll use Yahoo Messenger for remote room monitoring.
Most people that would want to tune into an event have XP already but I’m still wondering if they don’t have XP, then do I have to use Yahoo Messenger instead of MSN for Video? I guess I’ll eventually find out. If MSN Messenger allowed 150% and 200% zoom on the large screen size, and allowed you to configure it to allow people to tune into my webcam without permission, it would hit the Bulseye, but as usual, the product makers are not fully in touch with the wide range of consumer needs.
September 22, 2003 at 3:49 pm #90390FrutZleMemberSomething you might like is TrackerCam which is a webcam stand that allows panning, tilting and zooming (up to 300%) through a web interface. The software has an HTTP server built in so you go to a pre-set URL and from there you can check all through the room 🙂
I believe it also allows for audio to be broadcast, and you can restrict access to view the cam using a username and password so not everyone can take a look.Not cheap, but for surveilance it looks like a great “gadget”.
fixed the URL tag
September 22, 2003 at 4:27 pm #90393jazeeMemberIf trackercam had a text chat too, then it would fit my needs. I also just realized that MSN 6 only allows one person to se eyour cam at a time. Does Yahoo Messenger have this limitation. The people at http://www.anywebcam.com are claiming they will have a text chat component for their software soon. That may fit the bill. Not sure what the quality is on this product though,
September 22, 2003 at 5:33 pm #90389FrutZleMemberUsing MSN Messenger you can have more than one person viewing your cam at the same time, just as long as they are each in their seperate chat window. I’ve tried it and know it works.
Also, unless I’m mistaken there’s some kind of chat feature embedded in the web interface of the TrackerCam software. I haven’t installed or tried the software yet though since I don’t have a TrackerPod (yet?)…
November 19, 2003 at 12:04 am #90396mkMemberYes–TrackerCam has a text messaging feature. But it also works well in conjunction with the popular instant messaging services–TrackerCam supplies the video and the IM software does the text messaging. From the perspective of the IM software, TrackerCam just appears to be a webcam.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.