Whether running through XSplit native or through OBS/TriDef, the Stargazer was more consistent at recognizing the edges of an object, quicker to do so, and quicker to notice if something moved in front of the camera (i.e., if I moved my hand towards the screen, it would recognize that my hand was part of the foreground much quicker than the C922/Personify, which sometimes would black out my hand over my face). Not only is the Stargazer better in still frames, it’s also faster. It’s an issue that’s plagued software-side background removal since its inception. Even in optimal, well-lit scenarios, the C922 has a tendency to clip off hair in interesting ways, or shave off part of my face as I turn sideways. It simply looks for what it thinks is a human in the foreground, then removes everything else…with varying results. The C922 uses Personify’s “Intelligent Shape Recognition” instead. The Stargazer is able to determine how close something is to the camera, and uses this information to help it filter out whatever’s in the background. As I mentioned earlier, the Stargazer relies on Intel’s RealSense tech-including its depth-perception capabilities. It’s worth noting up front this is still a software solution. ![]() You could accomplish this with the C920 in software (via TriDef SmartCam for instance) but the C922 comes loaded with Personify ChromaCam. ![]() Which brings us to the C922’s other primary feature-background removal, sans green screen. Even 720p should be more than satisfactory for that. The webcam industry hasn’t kept pace with the smartphone industry in this regard.Īnd let’s be honest: Most people willing to spend $100 on a webcam are producing content for Twitch and YouTube, and in that case the C922’s primary job is to pump out a 200×200 pixel inset of a user’s face in the bottom-right corner of the screen. But Logitech’s hardly alone-the Stargazer tops out at 1080p. Could Logitech have pushed further? Is it weird that we still don’t have consumer-oriented webcams that capture greater than 1080p video? Maybe. If you’re buying a webcam for Skype/Hangouts/etc, then the C922 is really the best option. Here’s the C922 in optimal conditions, again versus the Stargazer: Great low-light performance is, of course, accompanied by the same great fully lit image. 720p streaming at 60 frames per second, for instance-a definite upgrade. Logitech’s touted all sorts of features in the lead-up to the C922. While Razer’s option is a bit stiff and unwieldy, I’m at least not worried about it breaking. This state of affairs feels particularly egregious in light of the thick, fabric-sheathed, and detachable cable that ships with Razer’s Stargazer. It’s not easily replaceable, it’s thin, it’s rubber-coated, and I’m perpetually worried I might pinch it or crimp it and render the camera unusable. If there’s anything I wish Logitech had upgraded in the last four years, it’s the flimsy rubber cable connecting the camera to the PC. You’d have better results setting it on a shelf or maybe on top of a tall computer speaker, provided you’ve got that sort of setup. ![]() It’s of decent enough quality, but resting it on my desk didn’t make for a very flattering camera angle-mostly my chin and nostrils. Your other option is to mount the C922 on a tripod-preferably a real one, though if you purchase through Best Buy, Logitech actually includes a miniature tripod, which unfolds and telescopes to about seven inches tall. The lip on the C922 is slightly longer than the Stargazer’s, so those with an ultra-thin monitor bezel might be annoyed to find that the lip hangs in front of the screen a bit. This also extends to the mount-the same L-shaped lip/joint used by the C920, with the bulk hanging down onto the rear of the monitor.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |