[HN Gopher] Opal Tadpole - A webcam for laptops
___________________________________________________________________
Opal Tadpole - A webcam for laptops
Author : jnthn
Score : 43 points
Date : 2023-11-14 14:45 UTC (8 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (opalcamera.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (opalcamera.com)
| superchroma wrote:
| Really sleek looking product, pretty impressive.
| _joel wrote:
| Instant turn off due to that god awful website
| yodon wrote:
| How does this compare to current generation MacBook cameras and
| microphones?
| berbec wrote:
| What is the market for this product? I can't see their being
| enough people who a. have a laptop without a camera/need a better
| camera b. are willing to lug this thing around and c. are willing
| to pay $200.
|
| How is web design this bad acceptable? It's insanely slow,
| annoying to read and impossible to navigate.
| viraptor wrote:
| $200 is within a typical tech budget spend and there's lots of
| people working remotely these days. I've spent over $100 on a
| good mic alone (not portable though).
| solardev wrote:
| I've actually been looking for a good webcam (with a big DSLR-
| like sensor) for the last few years, and this seems like the
| perfect product. Too bad it waited so long to come out...
|
| Most laptop webcams are terrible. Heck, most desktop ones are
| too. Even the high-megapixel ones have an image quality
| comparable to 10 years ago, and the average smartphone will
| blow them out of the water (hence Apple adding the iPhone as
| webcam feature, I guess).
|
| It's actually rare to see a webcam with a sensor this big (half
| inch/12.7mm).
|
| --------
|
| But yeah, god, that is probably the single worst product page
| I've ever seen in my life. When I tried to scroll down to the
| specs section, it locked itself into a giant version of its
| logo and I couldn't do anything else. Sigh. So annoyed by the
| website I left, even though the product is of real interest...
| jstummbillig wrote:
| I think the visual and web design is fairly great, felt very
| appealing to me. It's completely smooth and immersive on my
| 2020 MB Air (but I can see why it might suffer on other devices
| and screens sizes).
|
| The product is obviously somewhere in the niceties bucket; no
| one _needs_ this, but I am happy it exists. It gives me the
| warm and fuzzy feeling only something thoughtfully designed
| does.
| madeofpalk wrote:
| Me, right now. At home. I like my camera and mic in meetings to
| be clear and high quality. Gets dark at 3PM, any all the
| webcams have atrocious noise in anything less than the
| brightest rooms.
|
| I was using the Opal C1 for a while on my PC, but gave it away
| due to lack of official support on Windows, and it constantly
| losing focus/focus hunting in meetings.
|
| But,
|
| > _The Opal Tadpole Was made to go with you. Wrap it around
| your wrist or put it in its case to keep it safe._
|
| Who the hell is wrong to wrap their webcam around their waist??
|
| > _wrap your camera around your wrist as you go from meeting to
| meeting._
|
| ???
| yjftsjthsd-h wrote:
| In an ideal world, I'd probably prefer to buy a laptop with no
| built-in camera and then add a good quality one; this trivially
| improves the privacy situation (although models with a built-in
| shutter are also fine), and as others have commented the
| default cameras tend to have atrocious image quality so there's
| something to be said for separating it so people can get a good
| quality option.
| gizajob wrote:
| I think it's a hard sell for people to want to clip and
| external webcam _over_ the webcam already built into their
| laptops. It looks nice but it's a bit baffling why anyone would
| really need this nowadays. I get lots of pc webcams are crappy
| but that's not really a problem on your end.
| LeifCarrotson wrote:
| Low-budget streamers or those who end up effectively
| 'streaming' their web conferences. People who are using Blue
| Yeti mics and Elgato keylights or (a directly competing
| product) Elgato Facecam:
|
| https://www.elgato.com/us/en/p/facecam
|
| which is using a 1/1.8" sensor (8.8mm diagonal) at f/2.4
| aperture, and this has a 1/1.2" sensor (13.33 mm diagonal) at
| f/1.2.
|
| In this age of remote work, there are a lot of people who
| really value making a good impression - for whom the default
| webcam in their budget business laptop won't cut it - but don't
| want to have a whole DSLR-on-a-tripod streaming setup.
| OkayPhysicist wrote:
| Anyone who wants use web conference software should invest in
| an external webcam. Not only is it good for privacy (I don't
| trust software solutions, peripherals should have hardwired
| indicator lights and/or a way to hardware disable them when not
| in use), it's also a game changer when it comes to looking good
| on camera, because you can angle the webcam at angles that are
| far more flattering than the typical "looking up your neck" one
| that gets defaulted with built-in laptop webcams, and the
| quality difference between "adequate" and "good" is a big
| differentiator.
|
| Now, I haven't used THIS webcam, but it's definitely the sort
| of thing I'd be interested in.
| evanjrowley wrote:
| The clip design seems to force the camera to sit and a different
| angle than the screen. Is it intentional, or a design flaw?
| cloin wrote:
| I'm a really big fan of the C1. I'm curious what the image
| quality is like compared to the current webcam on the M2 Air and
| compared to the C1. The mute switch on the cable is a great idea.
| ayewo wrote:
| Yea, I thought having a physical mute button was cool.
| yjftsjthsd-h wrote:
| If the microphone can do what they say (only listen in that
| immediate area) then that's really cool. (Big if - I believe you
| can filter by angle, but my understanding of physics precludes
| filtering by distance; someone please correct me if I'm ignorant)
|
| The mute button is a good idea - I strongly prefer having a nice
| dedicated button, though in my case it's on the headset - but
| that placement seems guaranteed to put force on the USB port in a
| way that risks damage.
| _joel wrote:
| > If the microphone can do what they say (only listen in that
| immediate area) then that's really cool.
|
| Isn't that just some EQing for the vocal presense range and a
| level activated gate to turn it on when it's only above a
| certain threshold?
| Obscurity4340 wrote:
| I love this place just for comments like this
| _joel wrote:
| Yea, I know, I know, but really is it that hard to
| implement?
|
| It's not an rsync, ssh, backup etc. ;)
| Obscurity4340 wrote:
| Life is hard to implement :(
| _joel wrote:
| Fair comment
| Obscurity4340 wrote:
| That underscore before your name is very off-throwing ;)
| solardev wrote:
| I don't think it is:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38266165
|
| Something something tiny ribbon mic that only responds to
| sound waves perpendicular to its axis, something something,
| shielded from the sides something something. (Sorry, it's all
| a bit over my head, but it's more than using smart EQ and
| volume monitoring)
| solardev wrote:
| Apparently it uses some special directional mic from
| Soundskrit. Product page for the chip:
| https://soundskrit.ca/technology/
|
| The patent:
| https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/94/2b/ff/984fa6f...
|
| PR about the partnership: https://www.prnewswire.com/news-
| releases/opal-launches-tadpo...
|
| > A first on any consumer device, Tadpole's trademarked
| directional VisiMic(tm) microphone only captures audio that the
| camera can see. VisiMic is made in partnership with Soundskrit,
| the Quebec-based audio firm that specializes in cutting-edge
| directional microphone technology.
| smoldesu wrote:
| Do these webcams ship with USB class-compliant video? I
| considered the original Opal but immediately 'noped' out when
| seeing the companion app.
| johndough wrote:
| USB 2.0 at 200 MBps sounds like a serious limitation. 1080P is of
| course more than sufficient for the average video conference, but
| it seems kind of wasteful to use a 48MP sensor and then
| discarding most of the information, followed by lossy
| compression.
| solardev wrote:
| A large sensor isn't just for raw megapixels (which are
| arguably kinda useless in a video conference where most people
| are tiny parts of the gallery anyway), but the image quality
| and light sensitivity and such should all be a lot better. It's
| better that they use the large sensor and onboard signal
| processing to interpolate a denoise a good 1080p frame than the
| opposite -- most webcams cram too many pixels into a tiny
| sensor and give you a large but shitty video. Many good cell
| phone cameras do the same thing (start with an oversized 48MP
| sensor, but interpolate it to give you a high-quality 12MP one;
| only a few let you access the raw unprocessed 48MP stream).
|
| 200 Mbps should be more than enough to stream good quality
| video. YouTube suggests 40 Mbps for 4k@60Hz (compressed)
| https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2853702?hl=en#
| stuckkeys wrote:
| I have been using my iPhone as a webcam for the last 2 years. The
| quality is just phenomenal. EpocCam Pro.
| wahnfrieden wrote:
| It's now a feature built into macOS/iOS, to use iPhone as a
| webcam for a computer
| heeton wrote:
| I could never recommend this. I own a C1 and it's completely
| ruined by terrible software. On MacOS (various versions, on M1
| and now M3), it stops randomly, needs regular reconnecting. I'm
| on an old version of the app because the new version doesn't even
| work at all (hard freeze after an hour).
|
| Countless examples from forums and elsewhere of the same issues.
|
| Shame, because the hardware is cool.
| solardev wrote:
| Thanks for sharing this! This is exactly what I was afraid of
| -- that this might be a company focused on the "shiny" and not
| the polish. The website was a big red flag for me, but most
| reviews don't get into the nitty-gritty of stuff like that.
| dochtman wrote:
| I got a C1 too and apart from the crap software it also seemed
| like the camera isn't actually (significantly) better than the
| MacBook Pro (M1) camera anyway.
| needadvicebadly wrote:
| Echoing this. A bit miffed they've invested in an entirely new
| product without fixing the software issues of the C1.
| wilsonnb3 wrote:
| For what it's worth, the Verge reviewer said that the software
| isn't required, it is just a normal plug and play webcam with a
| much better user experience than the C1.
| rexxars wrote:
| I own the C1, and while I'm no big fan of the software - the
| quality is significantly better and makes it worth it in my
| opinion. I have occasional connection issues when I plug it in,
| but it usually settles after a few seconds.
|
| Most importantly, the new camera does not need any software -
| it's just a high quality webcam.
| cabirum wrote:
| I already go everywhere with a phone in my pocket, it has a
| couple of noise-canceling mics and (only) four cameras. Why the
| additional device where an app would suffice?
| asadm wrote:
| This is for CEO<->VC calls only. Where you use your seed fund to
| buy this and then go for series A.
| solardev wrote:
| Am I just really old, or is this web design atrocious...?
|
| I know HN skews traditionalist anyway, but even here, a site this
| bad stands out.
|
| I feel like normally we argue about user-invisible stuff like JS
| frameworks and analytics and tracking, but in this case it's a
| very in-your-face design meant to subvert all the common UX best
| practices in favor of something chic.
|
| Does anyone like this? (Who is supposed to?) I can't tell anymore
| if I'm just old-fashioned and grumpy, and totally out of touch
| with modern preferences, or if this is just... universally bad.
| sottol wrote:
| Has a Teenage Engineering vibe imo, which is a fan-favorite
| here.
|
| https://teenage.engineering/
| solardev wrote:
| That one strikes me as "minimalist but readable". It's clean
| and simple, and you can scroll down and read everything, one
| by one, left to right, without being assaulted by flying
| tiles or distracting animations that take your eye away from
| what it was trying to read.
|
| This one, on the other hand, reminds me of a "YouTubeified"
| website, where every thirty seconds there's some insane
| distraction flying in from the side of the screen and begging
| for your attention.
| sebtron wrote:
| Honestly, I can't tell.
|
| Literally: I clicked on the link and all I could see was a
| white dot blinking on a black background. After about 20
| seconds I gave up.
| yjftsjthsd-h wrote:
| Does it change if you scroll down? I also thought it was
| broken until I started scrolling and the page decided to show
| itself to me after all.
| sebtron wrote:
| No, blinking dot all the way down. Waiting some more does
| the trick.
| heavyset_go wrote:
| It's just comically over the top for a webcam IMO
| scaryclam wrote:
| It's horrible. Obnoxious loading, scolling and I couldn't see
| the product on my laptop until I scrolled, so it wasn't easy to
| even see what this "new species" of webcam looked like (page
| loads better on my desktop, so YMMV).
|
| The product itself looks suspiciously like a regular web cam as
| well, so it wasn't even worth the wait -\\_(tsu)_/-
| ramanujank wrote:
| I'd be happy to see comments on Linux compatibility. Could
| someone please link to the forums?
| callumprentice wrote:
| I use the Camo software that turns my phone into a webcam and the
| quality is astounding but it still suffers from the "appear to be
| looking elsewhere" issue.
|
| I have sketched out a design for a bracket that dangles your
| phone upside down, in front of the screen and turns the phone
| front camera into a webcam that's much closer to where you are
| typically looking.
|
| The interesting bit is that software on the phone displays the
| part of the monitor that's covered and creates a "seamless
| display experience" (slightly tongue in cheek).
|
| Not perfect by any means but maybe worth creating a prototype of
| both hardware and software to see how it feels?
| yodon wrote:
| Please make and sell this!!
| callumprentice wrote:
| Some of the things I considered:
|
| * Connecting wirelessly to the computer would be ideal. Camo
| and Apple's own Continuity Camera do this so it's certainly
| possible
|
| * There should be a computer companion app that lets you tweak
| the position of the monitor segment displayed on the phone
| screen - both for position, offset, color, temperature etc.
|
| * There would be a parallax effect, even with how thin today's
| phones are - I wonder if you could correct for that in the
| phone app and make it appear to be on the same plane.
|
| * Should it hand upside down from the top of the
| computer/laptop screen via a (magnetic?) widget or allow for
| positioning with a tall, skinny phone stand on the desktop in
| front of the monitor? Ideally both I guess.. Even left/right
| side if that made the engineering easier.
| eclipxe wrote:
| The hardware exists - PlexiCam
| (https://www.amazon.com/PlexiCam-Pro-Position-Anywhere-
| Deskto...)
|
| I use https://snakeclamp.com/ - you can build a custom arm
| setup. I use a magsafe attachment and mount a phone running
| Camo on it. Works wonderfully and easy to move out of the way
| when it's blocking my screen.
|
| Edit: Sorry didn't see the part about the part that projects
| your screen portion to the area that is occluded. That seems
| interesting but not sure how that would actually work...
| monkeynotes wrote:
| No way do I care enough about the quality of my laptop cam enough
| to spend more money and have another cable and device to carry
| around. I can't think who this is designed for. I guess they have
| a target audience, I just can't think of one.
| FiddlerClamp wrote:
| C1 wasn't Windows compatible at first, and this one doesn't come
| with desktop Windows software (only Mac software), if you read
| the fine print. Something to note.
| Modified3019 wrote:
| >THE TADPOLE IS JUST A TAD TALLER THAN A GUMMY BEAR.
|
| For clarification, this device is 1.75x2.25x1 international
| haribo gummy bear heights.
| wmf wrote:
| I assume an American gummi bear is much larger than an
| international one.
| laweijfmvo wrote:
| > With an f1.8 lens letting in as much light as a professional
| camera.
|
| Yeah probably not. What size sensor are they using?
| TD-Linux wrote:
| This is not a "mirrorless camera sensor", at least how it's meant
| to be interpreted. While technically mirrorless like all webcams,
| the sensor is under a quarter of the area of the smallest Sony
| mirrorless intechangeable-lens cameras.
| beAbU wrote:
| By their definition my phone camera also qualifies as
| mirrorless.
| Chilko wrote:
| Agreed, the line "WITH AN F1.8 LENS LETTING IN AS MUCH LIGHT AS
| A PROFESSIONAL CAMERA" is also quite misleading when using a
| much smaller sensor size.
| rubatuga wrote:
| What a scam.
| wmf wrote:
| They call their other webcam "DSLR quality" so at least they're
| consistent in their exaggeration.
| AlexAltea wrote:
| These guys have spammed me three times today via SMS, even
| _after_ unsubscribing from all their notifications.
|
| I'm sorry but I cannot take them seriously. Who in hell thought
| this is normal or acceptable?
| dubcanada wrote:
| > WRAP YOUR CAMERA AROUND YOUR WRIST AS YOU GO FROM MEETING TO
| MEETING.
|
| Who wraps their webcam around their wrist to go to a different
| meeting? I just don't understand the target of these
| ads/marketing.
| pwagland wrote:
| I suspect that most people just complain about "another thing
| to lug around", this is marketing speak to that problem.
| Certainly I wouldn't be that excited to carry around multiple
| items all day. Probably still wouldn't wrap the camera around
| my wrist either though...
| fermentation wrote:
| I purchased the Opal C1 and have had nothing but issues.
| Additionally, my experience with the company has been shady and
| disingenuous.
|
| My C1 has been far too hot ever since the day I got it. The heat
| causes it to shut down and disconnect after using for more than 5
| minutes. The only way I can actually use it is in low power mode,
| which removes all of the cool features and makes the video look
| worse. I have tried all of their software updates for the past
| year and nothing changed. I reached out to them multiple times
| over email for support and none of their suggestions helped much.
| Additionally, they advertised that PC support would come soon. It
| never came, and when I asked for a refund because they cancelled
| PC support I was ghosted.
|
| They texted me ads multiple times today.
| idle_zealot wrote:
| Is this a joke? Why is this camera marketed like a designer
| watch? And the market category seems absurd: attach this
| camera/microphone to your expensive computer that already has a
| camera and microphone built in.
|
| Altogether it comes off to me as parody, except they will
| actually take your money.
| iJohnDoe wrote:
| Is this satirical?
|
| The camera coats $175.00?
|
| The little plastic case is not included and costs $50?!?
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-11-14 23:00 UTC)