![]() |
2012-09-15
, 18:47
|
Posts: 2,292 |
Thanked: 4,135 times |
Joined on Apr 2010
@ UK
|
#12
|
So actually "yes", since higher wavelength means lower frequency ;-)
sixwheeledbeast has quite some point with his suggestion to use LEDs in the 850nm range. For those you should get specifications and redo the math.
The Following User Says Thank You to sixwheeledbeast For This Useful Post: | ||
![]() |
2012-09-17
, 22:08
|
|
Posts: 5,028 |
Thanked: 8,613 times |
Joined on Mar 2011
|
#13
|
![]() |
2012-09-27
, 06:07
|
Posts: 395 |
Thanked: 509 times |
Joined on Jan 2011
@ Brisbane, Australia
|
#14
|
Is there a reason you are using 940nm LED's?
You should get a better night picture with a lower frequency.
The only benefit of using higher frequency IR is to make it more invisible to humans.
Absolutely awesome! I was fighting with camera module 2 weeks ago (resulting in broken autofoxus in two camera modules - it works ok only for up to ~14 cm, don't want to focus on further objects, even via manual adjust, as per fcam or camera-ui from cssu), as night-vision via N900 was idea that "struck" me more than a year ago.
To be honest, after looking @ camera module internal, I haven't balls to try removing filter. It seems, that your first attempt resulted in ruined (scratched) sensor, but You know (now) how to do it properly.
Could You share Your experiences here, as detailed as possible? Some guide for removing (replacing by regular glass?) IR filter in N900's camera module would be great
---
OTOH, how You have destroyed original module by removing it (what happened)? Also, do you think that it's possible to fix broken autofocus on such module (or problems like ones I've described, with ~14 cm max focus distance), or module looks too delicate?
/Estel
![]() |
2012-09-27
, 08:07
|
|
Posts: 5,028 |
Thanked: 8,613 times |
Joined on Mar 2011
|
#15
|
![]() |
2012-09-27
, 08:12
|
Posts: 395 |
Thanked: 509 times |
Joined on Jan 2011
@ Brisbane, Australia
|
#16
|
![]() |
2012-09-27
, 09:34
|
|
Posts: 5,028 |
Thanked: 8,613 times |
Joined on Mar 2011
|
#17
|
![]() |
2012-09-27
, 11:39
|
Posts: 395 |
Thanked: 509 times |
Joined on Jan 2011
@ Brisbane, Australia
|
#18
|
The Following User Says Thank You to azkay For This Useful Post: | ||
![]() |
2012-09-27
, 13:02
|
Posts: 242 |
Thanked: 269 times |
Joined on Mar 2010
|
#19
|
I tried it with fcamera an hour ago, focus set to >5m outside is still blurry. Anything within a few meters is fine, though.
Guess it's the problem with not having the glass there.
The Following User Says Thank You to zlatokosi For This Useful Post: | ||
![]() |
2012-09-27
, 16:38
|
Posts: 2,292 |
Thanked: 4,135 times |
Joined on Apr 2010
@ UK
|
#20
|
Also, don't forget that the focus point is different in IR photography (although if you deal with this stuff you obviously know this). Maybe the autofocus needs to be "shifted" a bit to adjust to IR?
I'd like to answer your question from other thread rather here.
using several LED in series, with a smaller series-resistor, genarally yields better efficiency on same supply voltage.
with 70R resistors you should be safe to use 3 pcs LED specified as 1.3V@20mA in series, on a supply voltage of 5V. BTW aiui the datasheet says the LEDs can handle up to 100mA continuous forward current, I'd maybe go for 50mA.
OTOH sixwheeledbeast has quite some point with his suggestion to use LEDs in the 850nm range. For those you should get specifications and redo the math.
/jOERG
Maemo Community Council member [2012-10, 2013-05, 2013-11, 2014-06 terms]
Hildon Foundation Council inaugural member.
MCe.V. foundation member
EX Hildon Foundation approved Maemo Administration Coordinator (stepped down due to bullying 2014-04-05)
aka "techstaff" - the guys who keep your infra running - Devotion to Duty http://xkcd.com/705/
IRC(freenode): DocScrutinizer*
First USB hostmode fanatic, father of H-E-N