Camera bug and Suggestions to locate green

[Greg McKaskle]

The lights under the upper level act similar to the stage lighting, but it may be less even. It also depends on whether the ceiling curtain is open or closed. Atlanta is another reason why I'm curious to compare the fixed exposure to the auto.

Greg McKaskle

[Green2]

Unfortunately, we did not save any images to illustrate the differences.

As for Georgia dome, it would depend on what your camera sees. If there are a large variation of back lighting conditions based on where the camera is pointed, then I would recommend fixing exposure. If the background is relatively the same in all directions, then I think auto exposure would work better.

I would argue that the variation in background would be much more than the variation of light hitting the target. Yeah, in some areas of the field you might have slight dimming, but it should not be nearly as bad as exposure change due to a black background vs. a roll of lights.

I would recommend the teams going to nationals to hop on the field when ever possible to check things out and test the different settings.

[Greg McKaskle]

Bummer about the lack of images. I have tons, but they are taken with auto and there is no info about the exposure.

I agree with you about the lighting on field versus the background. I want to see the range difference when oriented different directions on the field and looking into the lights. I think that with the right calibration procedure, this may also produce good results. Hopefully better.

Because of the procedure, we still can't make this the default, but we can document it as a good alternative. Specifically, the camera will often lose a few frames before it adjusts the exposure, and it would be nice if those lost frames were back.

If someone can capture images using the Camera Field Test utility, that would be great. I'll see if an NI AE can grab them and share with everyone.

Greg McKaskle