From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mx3.redhat.com (mx3.redhat.com [172.16.48.32]) by int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m85FTxZW001181 for ; Fri, 5 Sep 2008 11:30:00 -0400 Received: from idcmail-mo2no.shaw.ca (idcmail-mo2no.shaw.ca [64.59.134.9]) by mx3.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m85FTn6J016780 for ; Fri, 5 Sep 2008 11:29:49 -0400 Message-ID: <48C15069.4030404@ekran.org> Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2008 08:29:45 -0700 From: "B. Bogart" MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jean-Francois Moine References: <48C05DC8.5060700@ekran.org> <1220568687.2736.12.camel@morgan.walls.org> <48C06C3A.5000104@ekran.org> <1220594487.1750.6.camel@localhost> In-Reply-To: <1220594487.1750.6.camel@localhost> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: video4linux-list@redhat.com, IOhannes m zmoelnig Subject: Re: V4l2 :: Debugging an issue with cx8800 card. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: video4linux-list-bounces@redhat.com Errors-To: video4linux-list-bounces@redhat.com List-ID: Hello Jean-Francois, I don't believe this is a size issue with svv (but it does appear to be one with Gem) but the image really looks like NTSC interpreted as PAL to me, in particular the VBI noise at the bottom. I ran your test to confirm and: bbogart@insitu:~/tmp/svv$ ./svv -rg -f 320x240 raw pixfmt: UYVY 320x240 pixfmt: UYVY 320x240 mmap method raw image dumped to 'image.dat' bbogart@insitu:~/tmp/svv$ ls -l image.dat -rw-r--r-- 1 bbogart bbogart 153600 2008-09-05 08:23 image.dat bbogart@insitu:~/tmp/svv$ ./svv -rg -f 640x480 raw pixfmt: UYVY 640x480 pixfmt: UYVY 640x480 mmap method raw image dumped to 'image.dat' bbogart@insitu:~/tmp/svv$ ls -l image.dat -rw-r--r-- 1 bbogart bbogart 614400 2008-09-05 08:24 image.dat >>From your message I assume a larger file means that indeed the image format is 640x480. Also mplayer shows video from this device as 640x480. Johannes, I'd feel better about svv "working" once I get the normal thing going, but what Gem files should I compare with svv for stuff like choosing the pixel format and allocating the size? I took a crack yesterday but I felt like I was following a string through a haystack through the various levels of abstraction from pix_video to v4l... FYI the behaviour is the same for Gem compiled with v4l2 and v4l. Thanks all, .b. Jean-Francois Moine wrote: > On Thu, 2008-09-04 at 16:16 -0700, B. Bogart wrote: >> I've not yet tried running your program, but did have some luck with: >> http://moinejf.free.fr/svv.c > > Hello B., > > It seems the driver cannot switch to 640x480. You may know it grabbing > images with svv. Try > svv -rg -f 640x480 > then > svv -rg -f 320x240 > and check each time the size of image.dat. > > Best regards. > -- video4linux-list mailing list Unsubscribe mailto:video4linux-list-request@redhat.com?subject=unsubscribe https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/video4linux-list