Sorry, my question may seem silly, since I newbie. Is it possible to use the ChipworkX with the camera 800x600. Going to make a model of the helicopter, and I want to get a laptop for WiFi a good picture from a height. 320x240 is too small. Tell me how I can get it in order to control and went on one WiFi connection. Again, sorry for my clumsy English, I’m from Russia. Thanks in advance)
A 800 x 600 bitmap requires about 1.92MB so storing the image in memory is not a problem
But, you will have difficulty finding a camera that supports the UVC protocol at that resolution. USB Video class (UVC) is the protocol that is supported by GHI. If you can not find a supported camera, then you would have to do your own USB driver for the camera, which is not a simple task.
UVC is a common protocol that many camera support in addition to a vendor specific interface. Usually, the higher resolutions are only support with the vendor specific interfaces and require vendor specific drivers.
Do you want still images, or video?
If video, most people when faced with this problem (First Person Video, FPV) use a dedicated solution to that problem. If you just want still images sent back to ground, that is an easier challenge and less of a bandwidth issue.
Mike, thanks for the help. If I understand correctly, the most important thing to pick up the camera driver from the manufacturer. And if there is a driver, you can even send a picture even bigger. Correct me if I do that that is not well understood. Problems with language skills, but Google is very helpful in this case))
I looked and found a lot of cameras with support for 800x600 UVC)) and even 1024x768 is. Here is one: http://goo.gl/WsuUO
Tell me please, will approach this?
Brett, thank you that responded. Yes, I want to receive real-time video on a laptop. Or through the WiFi router, it has much further to give the signal. And on the same channel to implement management.
No general embedded solution will give you that. You need to look at FPV solutions just for FPV. Then you need to look at command and control solutions separate to that. Not saying it’s not possible to get them in one, just that the chances of building that on general hardware is remote, and that you should consider those two things as separate and not related in any way. I happen to have been at http://www.nghobbies.com/ last week (even I dunno why !) but they seem to have a good handle on FPV.
Thanks for the advice. But this is not exactly what I wanted (
In the future I would like to manage the model of the house. And for many miles will WiFi router on the field, will keep in touch with the model.
And with FPV systems for this purpose have yet to pass the router to set and implement a computer video capture with subsequent transfer to the Internet (((
Closer then I think WiFi camera, and a separate control channel. But it is not as elegant and gromostko obtained (Anyway, thank you very much for participating, I hope there is a solution))
with UVC camera a driver is NOT required with chipworkx.
Mike, thank you very much! But 1024x768 chipworkx is also able to (pull) to convey?
Would not it be delays and hang-up shots? What I’ve read has said that for the video of this quality need a powerful processor. Is this chipworkx?
As the size of the image increases the amount of data that must be moved around increases.
You will be limited on how much data you will be able to get out of the device. I have never used a ChipWorkX, but it would be surprised if could get more than one megabyte a second out with Ethernet, even less with WiFi.
You will also be limited by the speed of the USB on the ChipWorkX. I don’t know the speed on the ChipWorkX, but many of the other boards are limited to around 12mb/sec.
With a 1024x768 image you have around 3MB a frame. You have limitations on the speed you can receive from the camera, and limitations with sending the data.
The ChipWorkX is not the platform for doing this type of high speed large frame capture and transmission.
it is unlikely that ANY GENERAL EMBEDDED SYSTEM will handle real-time video transmission over TCP/IP network. I would also suggest that it’s pushing the bounds of what is even possible at normal data transfer rates of TCP/IP via WiFi at that kind of resolution.
My personal view is your approach is going to fail. Video is intense, and needs specially designed hardware to achieve high throughput. Incorporating that with other controls in the way you’re considering will not be fruitful. There are different approaches here that are more sensible, and that is the kind of approach that has more chance of success, but you seem to discount those. The intent of your use-case isn’t clear either, and if you state your purpose clearly you may get some more specific options suggested that have a higher feasibility of success.
Then again if all you want to do is try something out, sure, go for it.
My wish is: to make model aircraft (no matter what type) and that would be able to control it from your home computer. And the video quality is at least 800x600. A model is run on the field where there is WiFi. By this I thought about WiFi.
Nah, a DCMI camera in JPEG mode at a reasonable resolution could be easily done in native mode. You’d use DMA to move the data straight off the camera and straight onto the built-in ethernet MAC. Probably even possible with an SPI ethernet layer, such as the ENC28J60, or WizNet.
Remember, we used to have “streaming video” on our 28.8 kbps modems. 10 mbps is a lot of bandwidth.
Thank you very much. Now I will for a long time and read a lot, met a couple of unfamiliar acronyms))
Don’t take my reply as a suggestion, just as theory. I don’t know if ChipworkX has a DCMI peripheral, but I do know that there are microcontrollers out there that do. It’s theoretically possible, but may be impractical given your constraints and software/hardware experience.
Good)) I will look for options and understand, yesterday came across an interesting new chip GA144-1.20 on the motherboard EVB001