4 ms·

I have no evidence to back this up, but I strongly believe that video quality would have similar effects. I am a hobbyist photographer and began using my gear t

I have no evidence to back this up, but I strongly believe that video quality would have similar effects. I am a hobbyist photographer and began using my gear to improve my video quality on calls 6-8 months ago and people have continually commented on it, from executives to regular schmucks like me. We're a visual species and having a better view of the person you are talking with will help form connections. It doesn't take a lot, but it will take a bit more cash outlay than improving your audio. You can get a cheap camera capture card for ~$15, a tripod for ~$50, a quality camera that supports running indefinitely on power with clean HDMI out (I use a Nikon Z5), and of course a compatible lens (I use a Nikon 50mm/f1.8 Z). The camera and lens you use will vary considerably in cost and quality, so you'll need to do some research to see if it will work for this. The result is amazingly clear video.

umeshunni 5y ago
But for video quality, it goes beyond the camera but also lighting, having a clean background and so on.
etblg 5y ago
Even just better lighting alone is a big step up. I started using this cheap desk-mounted mini ring light (with a slightly warm light) for calls, lighting the shade side of my face, and it makes your video look a lot more professional and flattering.
s_dev 5y ago
>I have no evidence to back this up, but I strongly believe that video quality would have similar effects Any dating website will have this as basic advice. Thats evidence enough for me. Higher quality images are associate with better looking people -- however this is counter intutive, you would think that a lower quality image would leave more to the imagination.
- Nasrudith 5y ago
  That brings to mind questions about how non-good their appearence would have to be to look worse with rising image quality. I say non-good because one could look hyperboring as opposed to ugly.
jcims 5y ago
I'm surprised nobody has released a reasonable quality USB camera that supports standard lens mounts. There are some out there but they seem to be suited more for computer vision projects than video conferencing.
- jakebasile 5y ago
  All of the camera manufacturers tried to jump on the Zoom call train to some extent. Every one of them released some form of Webcam USB driver, where you don't need a video encoder you just plug the camera directly in via USB and it shows up as a webcam. The downside is it's not as high quality as you'd get with an encoder, and not every camera supports charging during use. Canon at least released a couple "Webcam Accessories Starter Kits" that include a little tripod and an AC adapter to work around the USB charging limitation. I'm surprised the manufacturers didn't jump in even more but perhaps they were hampered by the pandemic. There have been significant supply chain disruptions in photography/videography industries for the past year.
crazygringo 5y ago
Honestly, a camera like that is super overkill. There are really only three things that matter for image in video calls: lighting, exposure, and background. Lighting is by far #1. Then some kind of exposure adjustment to lock it in during your call at the brightest level that won't blow out any areas of your face. As long as you've got those, there will then be zero difference between a cheap Logitech webcam and a fancy Nikon by the time the image has been downsampled and compressed. (And make sure you've got the focus and white balance set correctly as well of course.)
- jakebasile 5y ago
  Oh, it's definitely more than most people will need. I had the camera for photography and just decided to repurpose it. That said, a webcam can only do so much even with proper lightning and a clean background. They're never going to be as sharp, or as bright, as a nice fast lens on a quality camera.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - crazygringo 5y ago
    > They're never going to be as sharp, or as bright, as a nice fast lens on a quality camera. If you've got decent lighting, that's not true. My Logitech C920 -- the most popular webcam of all time -- outputs a fully sharp 1080p. With normal front lighting, it handles 30 fps perfectly without visible noise, i.e. full brightness. There's zero quality difference versus using my DSLR. It's as sharp and as bright. Now sure it can't do low-light conditions well or do 4K or depth of field or a fisheye lens or the other million things a DSLR can do... but for videoconferencing purposes it's literally indistinguishable in quality.
    - jakebasile 5y ago
      No amount of lighting can make up for the difference in sensor size, quality, resolution let alone the aperture and quality optics of a photographic lens. I'm sorry but you're just incorrect here. It might be minimal at Zoom resolution but it's absolutely there.
thamer 5y ago
You don't need a professional camera for this. There are a few apps like Camo[1] or NeuralCam Live[2] that let you use a smartphone as your webcam for a much better image quality than most webcams. Just get a phone clip with a flexible arm to mount it on your screen. Note that since they create a custom webcam device, these programs don't always work with native videoconferencing apps (check their websites for a list of supported apps). A common workaround is to use the platform's browser-based call interface, where the virtual webcam usually shows up without issues. [1] https://reincubate.com/camo/ https://reincubate.com/camo/ [2] https://neural.cam/live/ https://neural.cam/live/
datagram 5y ago
Conventional streaming wisdom is that audio quality matters more than video quality. That is, it's better to have bad video and good audio than good video and bad audio.

umeshunni 5y ago

But for video quality, it goes beyond the camera but also lighting, having a clean background and so on.

etblg 5y ago

Even just better lighting alone is a big step up. I started using this cheap desk-mounted mini ring light (with a slightly warm light) for calls, lighting the shade side of my face, and it makes your video look a lot more professional and flattering.

s_dev 5y ago

>I have no evidence to back this up, but I strongly believe that video quality would have similar effects Any dating website will have this as basic advice. Thats evidence enough for me. Higher quality images are associate with better looking people -- however this is counter intutive, you would think that a lower quality image would leave more to the imagination.

Nasrudith 5y ago
That brings to mind questions about how non-good their appearence would have to be to look worse with rising image quality. I say non-good because one could look hyperboring as opposed to ugly.

jcims 5y ago

I'm surprised nobody has released a reasonable quality USB camera that supports standard lens mounts. There are some out there but they seem to be suited more for computer vision projects than video conferencing.

jakebasile 5y ago
All of the camera manufacturers tried to jump on the Zoom call train to some extent. Every one of them released some form of Webcam USB driver, where you don't need a video encoder you just plug the camera directly in via USB and it shows up as a webcam. The downside is it's not as high quality as you'd get with an encoder, and not every camera supports charging during use. Canon at least released a couple "Webcam Accessories Starter Kits" that include a little tripod and an AC adapter to work around the USB charging limitation. I'm surprised the manufacturers didn't jump in even more but perhaps they were hampered by the pandemic. There have been significant supply chain disruptions in photography/videography industries for the past year.

crazygringo 5y ago

Honestly, a camera like that is super overkill. There are really only three things that matter for image in video calls: lighting, exposure, and background. Lighting is by far #1. Then some kind of exposure adjustment to lock it in during your call at the brightest level that won't blow out any areas of your face. As long as you've got those, there will then be zero difference between a cheap Logitech webcam and a fancy Nikon by the time the image has been downsampled and compressed. (And make sure you've got the focus and white balance set correctly as well of course.)

jakebasile 5y ago
Oh, it's definitely more than most people will need. I had the camera for photography and just decided to repurpose it. That said, a webcam can only do so much even with proper lightning and a clean background. They're never going to be as sharp, or as bright, as a nice fast lens on a quality camera.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- crazygringo 5y ago
  > They're never going to be as sharp, or as bright, as a nice fast lens on a quality camera. If you've got decent lighting, that's not true. My Logitech C920 -- the most popular webcam of all time -- outputs a fully sharp 1080p. With normal front lighting, it handles 30 fps perfectly without visible noise, i.e. full brightness. There's zero quality difference versus using my DSLR. It's as sharp and as bright. Now sure it can't do low-light conditions well or do 4K or depth of field or a fisheye lens or the other million things a DSLR can do... but for videoconferencing purposes it's literally indistinguishable in quality.
  - jakebasile 5y ago
    No amount of lighting can make up for the difference in sensor size, quality, resolution let alone the aperture and quality optics of a photographic lens. I'm sorry but you're just incorrect here. It might be minimal at Zoom resolution but it's absolutely there.

thamer 5y ago

You don't need a professional camera for this. There are a few apps like Camo[1] or NeuralCam Live[2] that let you use a smartphone as your webcam for a much better image quality than most webcams. Just get a phone clip with a flexible arm to mount it on your screen. Note that since they create a custom webcam device, these programs don't always work with native videoconferencing apps (check their websites for a list of supported apps). A common workaround is to use the platform's browser-based call interface, where the virtual webcam usually shows up without issues. [1] https://reincubate.com/camo/ https://reincubate.com/camo/ [2] https://neural.cam/live/ https://neural.cam/live/

datagram 5y ago

Conventional streaming wisdom is that audio quality matters more than video quality. That is, it's better to have bad video and good audio than good video and bad audio.