TrainsMag.com Reader Poll – February 9, 2004

[Train Guy 3]

Leave it the way it is, it works for me.

[ajpaschal]

Keep it the wway it is

[Anonymous]

[:I] I just very carefully watched my clock to see exactly how long 3 seconds are and then timed 1 1/2 seconds. In my not so humble opinion there simply is not enough difference in the timing to make a big difference - at least not enough
to make a change. Leave as is. As for those who can't tell which way the train is going - I would put an really big question mark here. I could always tell, even from childhood, what the front of the trains looked like. Adios y'all
Irish Pat

[lhrfan]

Keep it the way it is. A larger picture would be nice, but bandwidth limits may again be an issue. How about a camera on top of the shopping center overlooking 69th st. in North Bergen NJ. 6 or 7 tracks crossing this busy street with NYSW, CSX, & NS constantly moving across with locals, switching, and thru trains. Always busy.

[Anonymous]

WOULD ENJOY MORE SITES IF POSSIBLE

[ernwes]

Share the wealth...1.5 sec vs. 3 sec isn't worth blocking half the viewers.

[Anonymous]

when I 1st found this web cam, a person could see traffic running on HI-WAY, behind the warehouse, so someone has change angle to camrea,maybe change back to way it was that would give wider angle, what say trainmag. HUB

[mikeyuhas]

QUOTE: Originally posted by hhuubb

when I 1st found this web cam, a person could see traffic running on HI-WAY, behind the warehouse, so someone has change angle to camrea,maybe change back to way it was that would give wider angle, what say trainmag. HUB

The camera position has not changed since startup in May 2000, and we have no plans to change it now.

[Noah Hofrichter]

Does any body know how many people can watch the webcam at the same time[?] I just wanted to know.

Thanks, Noah[:P][8D][:)][:P][;)]

[GRR7315]

I say double; it's a spot to enjoy NOT LIVE AT. Take advantage of the action, then let someone else enjoy as well.

[Anonymous]

I've been to Rochelle, nothing beats being on scene and feeling the trains. BUT I also live 400 miles away and since I can't get there often enough viewing the cam is next best. Don't cost me time by doubling the bandwidth, I can live with 3 seconds. If you could add scanner traffic or other sites I can't get to you'd only enhance my viewer experience

[Overmod]

Perhaps somebody can enlighten me on a couple of points:

Last time I looked, a set of streamed frames from a Webcam was just that: a STREAM. Multicast protocol and all that. There ARE no restrictions on the number of 'simultaneous users' who can access a multicast stream... just the number of users that correspond to ports on a single server to which the Webcam appears to be connected. Now, I'm not trying to look a gift horse in the mouth... but better answers might be available.

A change in the protocol used, or in the service provider(s) who make the digital stream available to the Web, might be better 'better answers' to consider, both 'before' and 'in place of' the rather contrived 'double the frame rate'. Perhaps a single-port stream uplinked to one of the streaming-media companies might represent a reasonable solution; you would then download a small .ram (or similar) file, which whenever clicked would provide the settings and links to connect you to the streaming service (RealNetworks for a .ram file).

I also see comparatively little trouble with scalable bandwidth if you elect to increase the 'pipe' capacity between the camera and whatever is putting the pix on the Web. Please enlighten me on the 'bottlenecks' between camera and server (as I find it very difficult to believe that a Webcam image every three seconds, or 1.5 seconds either, is straining the capacity of an ISP.

Anyway, if you update the camera link so it can send .75fps at whatever resolution, you can always opt to 'send less data' to give the current 1/3fps. Run at high resolution until whatever cockamamie software is kicking the longest user off reports that it is kicking people off. Then scale to lower resolution (for a period of time), send a message to the users that it's happened and why, etc. Or request that some users disconnect 'gracefully' before the rate has to be changed. Yes, even railfans may be polite and savvy enough to be trusted with user-interface decisions... ;-}

Of course, use of a better compression protocol, at or near the camera, might allow an increase in the effective displayed frame rate without losing any real information. I'm currently developing this for wireless medical devices, to be able to compress and then 'interleave' multiple sensor inputs such as EKG trace on a single narrowband connection and then restore them to continuous stream with some (acceptable) latency via buffering and decompression.

When I was in school in Manhattan, I would drive my father to his office very early in the morning -- before the morning paper was delivered. I noticed my father very avidly reading the paper one morning. It was yesterday's paper: he pointed out that it was just as much fun, and he really didn't much care that the news was a bit out of date.

Let me ask this related question: Do Webcam users really care if they're watching a train at the precise instant it passes the camera, or ten seconds later in realtime? (Aren't delays in the Internet fabric likely to impose similar delays anyway?)

And, if the answer is that you really don't care if your stream is a few seconds later than 'reality' -- would you accept the later timing if it gave you a higher frame rate and/or better rendered picture quality at no additional cost?

That seems to me to be a better question than the one that's been posed...

[JoeUmp]

Keep the settings the same.

[Anonymous]

I am very pleased with all of the replies on Rochelle. Sound being included, more camera sites, leave the setting alone were great. Too bad we could be forewarned about the arriving trains to the diamonds. Global3 operations drive me nuts because you don't if the train is switching or going thru. When I saw a train going between the roads (on the left side of the screen) I could not believe it. Saw the tracks, but finally saw them being used. Finally to the train man in Texas-I heard the trains when I was in the dorms. It helped me cope. Now I live further east and have to strain the ears to hear the horns. Somethings never change.

[Anonymous]

Double the B/W. I can't get on now anyhow.

[Anonymous]

Its fine the way it is, but a 1.5 sec frame rate would be nice. I rarely watch the cam for more 10-15 minutes anyways, so if I was kicked off after that amount of time it wouldn't matter to me. How do long do other people generally watch it? How long would it be before one would be "bumped" off, if the frame rate was 1.5 sec?

[Anonymous]

As a UK viewer, I usually log on during the early hours of the morning, US time, when there are't that many viewers on line. I'd like to see the faster rate, but if it means that less folk would be able to enjoy the action, probly best to keep it as it is.

[Anonymous]

keep it the way it is. now! if they could just add some light for nighttime viewing

[Anonymous]

Keep as is!

[Anonymous]

I say keep it as it is, 'cause sometimes your turn is only a couple minutes long.[#ditto][soapbox]

[Anonymous]

Yes, I wouldn't mind if the image rate was increased, but then I'm usually viewing when most of your other viewers are asleep. More sites would be great, as would sound, and other camera angles

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by mikeyuhas

QUOTE: Originally posted by hhuubb

when I 1st found this web cam, a person could see traffic running on HI-WAY, behind the warehouse, so someone has change angle to camrea,maybe change back to way it was that would give wider angle, what say trainmag. HUB

The camera position has not changed since startup in May 2000, and we have no plans to change it now.

I think the user meant your other cam site , When I started from a different computer at my inlaws house about two years ago. You had another web cam wich is nolonger in use. Thank You for your time.

[Anonymous]

Technology is great, but at the price of reducing availability? Definitly keep it like it is!
[soapbox]

[halifaxcn]

I say keep it as is.
But why not get a few more cameras out there? How about speaking with the City of Dolton, IL and mounting a camera on their City Hall. This is a GREAT hot spot with a never ending parade of trains! Then again how about Elmhurst, IL, LaGrange, IL, Palmer, MA.
All it takes is money!

Anyway, it is my dream to see a Dolton web cam.

Happy & safe railfanning!
Frank San Severino
Attleboro, MA.

[Anonymous]

keep it as it is. it sure would be nice to see another cam in fostoria ohio, also add a live radio feed into the system.

[GaryH1]

It is fine the way it is now, so keep it that way, please!

[richardy]

Keep it as is. I have been bumped several times. The scanner traffic would be great!

[Anonymous]

Leave it just the way it is. mlundy

[Anonymous]

Change it, 1.5 is better than 3. Who cares if it cuts the number of viewers in half? The better quality is definitely worth it!!!! Whats wrong with you people who don't want to change it?!!!!

[Anonymous]

The 3 seconds for a new frame is ok! But, I didn't know there was a limit! If the limit gets smaller, I might get stuck out! And when you're on a strick schedule, that's SUPER bad!!![:(] If it stays like it is, MORE of us can watch it.[:)]