Slashdot Mirror


Philips Demos Keychain-sized Camcorder

mateub writes "Philips gave PC Magazine an exclusive demo of the KEY019 USB camera/camcorder etc. Sez PCMag: 'You can use the 128MB of internal memory for 2.0-megapixel still shots, digital video, MP3 files, and document storage.' How long before we read the first story of some, um, inappropriate footage captured with one of these?"

58 of 151 comments (clear)

  1. "inappropriate footage" by theraccoon · · Score: 5, Funny

    How long before we read the first story of some, um, inappropriate footage captured with one of these?

    Just as soon as I can buy one...

    1. Re:"inappropriate footage" by DoraLives · · Score: 4, Funny
      So when does this sort of thing finally render the whole clothing gig hopelessly silly? Put the damned things on when they're actually NEEDED, and don't when they're not.

      What the fuck is the Big Deal here?

      The bluenoses have run things for SO long that we've come to take it completely for granted that the sonofabitches are actually RIGHT.

      They're not.

      Enough footage from devices like this and eventually everybody will saturate on the input, collectively shrug their shoulders over it, and get on with living their lives, minus one more retarded Cultural Imperialist bullshit item to put up with.

      Not only will the emperor NOT have any "new clothes," it will be perfectly ok and people will need to have that little tale explained to them, even as they shake their heads in disbelief at the overarching stupidity of their forebears.

      --
      Is it fascism yet?
    2. Re:"inappropriate footage" by Bodrius · · Score: 2, Funny

      You're that naked guy from the radio show in Grand Theft Auto 3, right?

      --
      Freedom is the freedom to say 2+2=4, everything else follows...
  2. I gotta get one of those by mindless4210 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    That's a pretty sweet little toy. I wonder how much one of those costs... and how effective is it? I know there's probably a thousand different uses for something like that.

    --
    Wireless News www.DailyWireless
    1. Re:I gotta get one of those by e9th · · Score: 5, Informative

      Their 1 megapixel version sold for $130, so it probably won't be too much more than that.

  3. how much video can the camera hold? by tsunamifirestorm · · Score: 4, Insightful

    128Megs doesnt seem like much. or if it is, the video is probably lo-fi

    1. Re:how much video can the camera hold? by colinramsay · · Score: 5, Informative

      Take a look here for a handheld camera which can be upgraded to use 128mb SD cards. In it's standard 8mb form, it can take 2 minutes of low res footage at 15fps.

      Just a comparison. We got one, it's really pretty good for the price.

    2. Re:how much video can the camera hold? by stienman · · Score: 5, Insightful

      MPEG4. They recorded at least 20 minutes of it. Since they didn't mention quality, and they stressed (repeatedly) that it doesn't replace current camcorders then we can safely assume that the image quality is, at best, standard tv quality. Still, that's much better than the old CIF stuff most digital cameras do, and the convenience factor (carry it everywhere, whip it out at a moment's notice) is worth it for some people.

      I expect low-budget proctology offices everywhere buying them in droves... Hope you've got good healthcare.

      -Adam

    3. Re:how much video can the camera hold? by SmackCrackandPot · · Score: 2, Insightful

      For comparison, one of the latest digital cameras can record colour video with sound, but there usually is a maximum video clip limit size of 8 Mbytes (or around 60 seconds), and the resolution is limited to 320x200 during this time. And it takes around 30 seconds to compress the video. So maybe this video camera could store around 10 minutes of video with video at 320x200.

    4. Re:how much video can the camera hold? by iamhassi · · Score: 3, Interesting
      pfffft... my canon A60 is smaller than that thing (A60's 101.0 x 64.0 x 31.5mm vs SiPix's 100 x 74 x 36mm) plus it takes 180 seconds (3 min) of continuous 320x240 15fps video and it takes excellent 2mp pics with a 3x optical zoom (vs no optical zoom on the SiPix), storing them on dirt cheap CF cards and 4 AA batteries allow lots of videos! Best part: the price. $65 after mail in rebate! Or you can just buy them for $165 at any walmart.

      $91 for that "SiPix Pocket DV Camcorder" is a waste of money.... oh did you say you bought one?

      The A70 is the same size but takes 3mp and 640x480 video, although it's considerably more expensive.

      --
      my karma will be here long after I'm gone
    5. Re:how much video can the camera hold? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The Canon S500's are much smaller than the A60/A70. They seem to have similar spec's both for still and motion capture.

      But, in 640x480 mode, it's only 10fps. In 320x240 mode, it supports 15fps.

      The Sony DSC-T1 has the best video I have heard of.. 640x480 @ 30fps. But, I hear the still image quality sucks.

      In movie mode with the Canon S400, you cannot use the Zoom. I am not sure about the others, but especially at the relatively low resolutions that's a big limit.

      What I am looking for is: DVD quality, 720x480p (preferably with 16:9 widescreen capability), and
      30 fps and 60 fps modes.

  4. download by appleprophet · · Score: 5, Funny

    "How long before we read the first story of some, um, inappropriate footage captured with one of these?"

    More importantly, how long until the torrent is posted?

  5. Great But... by jchawk · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This is great and all but who wants 2 megapixel anything? Camera phones, this device are create for getting quick shots, but honestly do you want to archive them? They simply don't look good, because the color is off, usually they're fuzzy etc...

    I'm not knocking this device, but I have a feeling it's a sign of better devices to come. With in a year or 2 I would bet you start to see 4 and 5 megapixal devices like this... This is when they are really going to take off!

    1. Re:Great But... by AJWM · · Score: 4, Informative

      Considering that 2 megapixels gives you slightly more pixels than fit on a 1600x1200 computer screen, that's actually pretty darn good (depending on the quality of the pixel). You must still be thinking of the old cheapy 640x480 (1/3 megapixel) devices.

      Granted you need more if you want photo-quality prints, but it's more than adequate for on-screen use. In a device this small, the real limitation is the size and quality of the lens (ie, crappy) rather than the resolution of the sensor. There's a reason that good cameras have big lenses, and it has little to do with the size of the sensor or film they're recording on.

      --
      -- Alastair
    2. Re:Great But... by winsk · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This is great and all but who wants 2 megapixel anything? Camera phones, this device are create for getting quick shots, but honestly do you want to archive them? They simply don't look good, because the color is off, usually they're fuzzy etc...

      2 megapixels is perfectly fine unless you want to make large prints. The color being off, or the picture being fuzzy has more to do with the quality of the optics, the CCDs, etc.

    3. Re:Great But... by odie_q · · Score: 4, Insightful

      5 megapixels is overkill for a lot of applications. For ordinary 15cm (~6") photo paper printouts of vacation photos, 3 Mpixels is enough. For web use I'd say 1Mpixel is plenty good enough.

      Bad quality is more often due to crappy lenses and ultra-low quality CCD's than low resolution. If a 2Mpixel CCD is cheaper than an equivalent 4Mpixel one, it has a place in the market.

      --
      ...ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.
    4. Re:Great But... by Rolo+Tomasi · · Score: 2, Informative

      The problem is that the tiny, crappy lens doesn't even have an optical resolution of 2 megapixels.

      --
      Did you know you can fertilize your lawn with used motor oil?
    5. Re:Great But... by juhaz · · Score: 2, Informative

      2 megapixels is just fine for lots and lots of things. Few years old "real" non-professional digicams are 2mpixel, most of the time the pictures from those are just fine. They are light years ahead of this thing, despite the same theoretical resolution.

      These, on the other hand, as you point out, simply don't look good, they look fuzzy, and the colors are off, but that's not because they don't have enough resolution on CCD, it's because they have absolutely CRAPPY optics, and crappy electronics, and crappy software.

      Unless the optics get a lot better (they wont't, size and especially price places some limits...) you won't get any major improvement in few years even if someone is insane enough to put a 5mpixel CCD in one of these, 5 megapixels of blurry lens does not look any better than 2 megapixels worth of blurry lens, it's just a bigger picture of same crappy lens.

    6. Re:Great But... by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I disagree that 1MP is enough for web use. If you weren't going to scale the image that would be true, but any time you scale an image by anything other than doubles or halves you end up doind a bunch of weird interpolation and you lose data. A lot of it. If you're going to scale an image at all in any direction then you want as much information to start with as possible.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  6. Already happened. by domodude · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This sure does top the JB1 camera that ThinkGeek sells.

    As per the "choice" footage and pictures, this has already happened with the new camera phones. Mobileasses.com or something to that order.

  7. Now you can store it safely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    And record the people who decide to strip search you at the airport.

  8. Roll your own RPV by Trespass · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Add something like this to a radio controlled model airplane and you've got a (relatively) cheap platform for surveillance or air survey work. Could have uses in archeology as well.

  9. I wouldn't worry by Mia'cova · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Cameras are getting smaller and smaller anyways. I don't know what advantage having it on your keychain does for any kind of voyeurism. Just turn on your TV and you'll bump into one of those hidden-camera comedy shows. How long before we're getting all of those in HDTV? It's really not hard to film without being noticed.

    We all just have to get used to it. We're going to be recorded everywhere we go in public and our friends are going to get thousands of horrible photos of us.

    I just have a regular 3 megapixel camera and already have something like 10,000 photos saved. My friends have cameras too and take just as many photos. I know there must be bad / 'compromising' (lol) photos of me I haven't seen but really it's no big deal. We all just finally need to get used to it and stop being so fricken camera shy!

    Smile :)

    1. Re:I wouldn't worry by oberondarksoul · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'm not entirely sure it'll be too easy to not be 'camera shy' with the knowledge that the Powers That Be could very easily be on the other end of those cameras, being the ones who record us "everywhere we go in public". I, for one, wouldn't be too comfortable with that.

      --
      And tomorrow the stock exchange will be the human race
    2. Re:I wouldn't worry by iamhassi · · Score: 2, Informative
      "Cameras are getting smaller and smaller anyways. I don't know what advantage having it on your keychain does for any kind of voyeurism."

      A) it's smaller and easier to conceal than standard small cameras
      B) doesn't look like a camera so it's less obvious you're recording
      C) sometimes you're in situations where you didn't plan on something happening so you didn't bring your trusty camera, like the girl dancing on the bar during happy hour (usually that's unexpected, although I know some bars...)

      this would be great in strip clubs where you're not allowed to bring cameras in.... wonder how it handles in low light? Please include "nightshot", the world needs more Paris Hilton type videos ;)

      --
      my karma will be here long after I'm gone
  10. what we can't see... by cliveholloway · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...is the whole camera. All the pics are close-ups. My guess is because it's actually about 2ft long and they don't want to scare us off.

    cLive ;-)

    --
    -- Trinity in high heels carrying a whip: The donimatrix - there is no spoonerism
    1. Re:what we can't see... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      So you're really saying that it's even more of a 'convergence product' than PCMag wants to admit, i.e. "the ladies will love it"...

  11. Inappropriate footage by AtariAmarok · · Score: 4, Funny

    " How long before we read the first story of some, um, inappropriate footage captured with one of these?""

    This is much more likely if they add a vibrator mode to the thing.

    --
    Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
  12. Inappropriate? by colinramsay · · Score: 4, Insightful

    See, the thing I always wonder when people bring up this topic is this - the technology to record people without their permission has been here for a while. Be it photographic, video, or audio, there have been accessible means to invade someone's privacy for quite a number of years.

    What devices like this represent are a proliferation of this technology. And the uses to which it is put is not a problem of the technology, it's a problem of society.

  13. But what? by baudilus · · Score: 2, Insightful

    2 megapixels is sufficient for most applications. Remember, the digital camera on the Mars Rover is only 1 megapixel. If you need to take higher quality picture / movies, buy a higher quality piece of hardware. Something tells me that the truly useful applications for this type of device (e.g. clandestine) do not cry out for super-high quality photos.

    It's also good for getting that quick shot of your buddy spewing chunks because who carries around a big digital camera everywhere they go? This you can keep with you at all times.

  14. Why must.. by dj245 · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Why must companies create these silly devices that they call "camcorders" that really have little or no storage space to speak of? It isn't a proper camcorder, it is a gimmick. 128mb of space is not a lot of space. Not only that but the firmware of the thing means you don't get the whole 128mb. Add in a lossy (lousy?) mpeg codec, and you'll be lucky to get five minutes at any kind of watchable quality. I hope people don't actually buy these things expecting a halfway decent recording device. The image sensor must be terrible (being so small and cheap) Good thing its a camera too, because its a pathetic camcorder.

    I hope we don't see more of these things in the future. Do these companies have focus groups? What focus group with any sanity decided they wanted a camcorder with 5 or so minutes of storage? More likely they wanted a camera that could record a video (maybe) but that isn't the way this thing is being marketed. Just because you can easilly and cheaply add features to existing products doesn't mean you have to promote them and market them as primary functions. (Camera phones anyone?)

    --
    Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
    1. Re:Why must.. by timeOday · · Score: 3, Interesting
      yeah, too bad they couldn't go for 256 megs.

      On the other hand, I record TV shows on my computer, and I've set the bitrate so 1 hour fits on a CD (700 megs) and the quality is pretty good IMHO. So at the same bitrate, 128 megs would hold around 10 minutes of video. I don't know about you, but I seldom shoot more than 10 minutes of Camcorder footage for anything, because it would be too boring to watch.

    2. Re:Why must.. by dj245 · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Thats why some people shoot for hours and hours and then take all the interesting bits and put them into a 3 minute clip so they don't bore people to tears. Its like in American Football. In 3 hours, maybe 2 minutes of something really exciting happens.

      Oh and television capping at a really high bitrate and then post-recompressing to a 2-pass codec (Xvid, mpeg2, divx, whatever you want) will give the exact file size you want and much better results compared to fixed-rate low-bandwidth encoding. Thats why these types of camcorders suck, they do fixed-rate at low bitrates and 2-passing later only gives lower file sizes of the already crappy looking video.

      --
      Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
    3. Re:Why must.. by aussersterne · · Score: 2, Insightful

      25 minutes of MPEG-4 is what they claim on the Web site. That's not bad. I personally think any more than ten minutes of home video at any particular event begins to enter boring city. I certainly don't want to see a full two hours of little Jimmy's birthday or even Our Excellent Spring Break. A few minutes of footage is all that's required to get the gist of most events.

      --
      STOP . AMERICA . NOW
    4. Re:Why must.. by Frennzy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think it's more of a 'because we can' attitude. I am actually quite pleased with convergence in data storage devices...the video is just another input.

      I DON'T like the fact that I had to buy a 'camera phone' to get the other phone features I wanted.

      However, this would be a real handy gadget to have. (And it's just that...a gadget...+1 Karma to whomever can identify the origin of that word...specifically, whose name it came from and what they are most famous (in the US) for...no googling, you cheaters).

      As a cheap and easy way to move over a hundred megs of data from place to place, I like it. The fact that if you happened to see something noteworthy, like, say, a hostage situation or a plane going down and you could just pull out your keys and record it (in poor quality, yes) for posterity, is just a bonus.

      Plus, if it gets people interested in buying technology again, so much the better. We need tech jobs growth (in all sectors)

      Come to think of it, I have a great idea for this...do new video projectors have USB inputs and file translation capabililites? If they don't, they soon will. Now those marketing droids won't need laptops...they can put together their PowerPoint presentations and them load them onto their keyring, and just jack that into the projector.

  15. Pictures and More Info by sethml · · Score: 5, Informative

    There are some nice pictures and such in a Philip press release at:
    http://www.press.ce.philips.com/press/2004-2-23-Ce bit2004-568.html

  16. Inappropriate footage?? by 77Punker · · Score: 3, Funny

    Where?! Anybody got a .torrent??

  17. Oh Great by esac17 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Does that mean we won't be able to have our keys out in the gym anymore? Last night my fiancée called me as I was dressing and the locker room attendant politely asked me to put my cell phone away because people were afraid of getting their pictures taken with the camera phones. Now will there be a reason to limit, if not to start searching our bags everywhere we go.

  18. Re:128 Megs... by proverbialcow · · Score: 5, Funny

    [128 megs] Isn't nearly enough for the sex video!

    Whoa, slow down there, pr0n star! Some of us have jobs, and lots of stress. 128 megs might easily store two or three...

    --
    The only surefire protection against Microsoft infections is abstinence. - The Onion
  19. Nice try, but no dice? by zipwow · · Score: 2, Informative
    If it isn't mentioned in the article, can you point out where it is mentioned? The thing I'm seeing pictures of here doesn't look like it has any kind of digital viewfinder apart from some glass. The specifications list a "2 element optical viewfinder" which I think equates to "glass and mirrors".

    -Zipwow

    --
    I don't know which is more depressing, that 2/3 didn't care enough to vote, or that 1/2 of those that did are crazy.
    1. Re:Nice try, but no dice? by lhaeh · · Score: 2, Informative
      I though it was just a regular cheepo plastic lens viewfinder as well, its hard to imagen they packed it so tight with features.

      You have to click on the 'exclusive slideshow' link at the bottom of the page. From the article:

      This viewfinder also acts as a microdisplay for viewing video playback (you'll need to plug the headphones in to hear sound). The trashcan symbol sits to the left of the delete button, which deletes whichever pictures or clips you're viewing. Below the button are the Power and Memory indicators [[inset]] (labels for each are to the left).

  20. Re:Notice they never mentioned the price by irokitt · · Score: 3, Funny

    "Honey, where's the video camera?"

    "It's with the car keys."

    (pauses to look for the car keys)

    "Fsck!"

    --
    If my answers frighten you, stop asking scary questions.
  21. Re:Also known as.... by Neon+Spiral+Injector · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I bet they don't have a high-pass filter on the CCD, so they'd be infrared sensitive. You could illuminate with an IR led, and no one would even see the light source.

  22. I will buy one of these. by e9th · · Score: 4, Funny

    If I had a nickel for every time I've said, "Damn, I wish I had a camera," I'd already have enough nickels to pay for the thing.

  23. Keep governments on their toes by t_allardyce · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Ok i know the world needs more food and medicine than anything else but we should send loads of these things to countries like china, iraq, america & cuba etc where there are oppressive regiemes in oparation, they could be used to capture countless numbers of human rights atrocities! Yes i know they're all made in china.

    --
    This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
  24. You read slashdot by ad0gg · · Score: 4, Funny

    We don't want to see inappropriate footage of solo acts performed in your basement.

    --

    Have you ever been to a turkish prison?

  25. This is a nice idea for novelty use and the like.. by phaetonic · · Score: 2, Insightful

    but for the people who sport tin foil, realize that certain government agencies have had much better mini video cameras for quiet a while...

  26. At only $249 MSRP... by josh+glaser · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ...it sounds great, but it is $100 more expensive than the Gateway (the current best buy for tapeless camcorders, because it's not $800 like most). It has double the memory, but lacks a card slot (and an LCD display). So for it's value, well, I'd say they're both good buys for people who want an ultra-cheap camcorder that's small (these things go for convienience and such, not for super-high quality) and just fun. I'll probably buy one of these things just so I can always have a camcorder around to take video of stuff that happens (I don't want to have my "real" camcorder with me all the time). For now, that's really what I see the market for these (and, say, camcorder phones) is - when these things have hard drives, well, then they might be more of a viable alternative to a "real" camcorder. But like them a lot now - they're tiny, cheap, and you can always have them with you to capture life - in all its spontaneity.

  27. Is it *really* 2 MP? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    The KEY007 is marketed as 1.3MP, but it only has a 0.3MP sensor, and the images are upscaled to 1.3MP. All I see is "2MP sized images", nothing about what the sensor really is? Nowhere does the press release mention the sensor size, only that it produces 2 megapixel images. My gut feeling tells me that this is a 0.3MP camera, or maybe if we are very lucky, a 1.3MP camera, that is upscaled to 2MP. I'd love to be wrong.

  28. duh by douthat · · Score: 3, Funny
    How long before we read the first story of some, um, inappropriate footage captured with one of these?"
    That's how they beta tested it.
    --
    She loves me: 09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0 She loves me not: 09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688BF ...
  29. Cost by Therlin · · Score: 4, Informative
    $280 at Amazon.com (shipping early June)

    Link to pre-order

  30. electronic viewfinder is new by morcheeba · · Score: 2, Informative

    That version had just a passive lens viewfinder; this new version has an electronic microdisplay that lets you see previously recorded videos or pictures. That ought to rise the price quite a bit.

  31. Re:Also known as.... by Lehk228 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I think the band referred to would probably be Far Red, sorta but not really visible but not quite IR yet, some TV remotes you can see a very slight flicker from the emitter of the remote when pushing a button,

    --
    Snowden and Manning are heroes.
  32. Is it really 2 MP? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    The 1.3 MP is actually 0.3MP

    see http://www.doyourthing.philips.com/tt_camera_key_r ings_additional_info.cfml

    How does it work?
    Your Camera Key Ring captures pictures using a VGA sensor, which displays about 300,000 pixels (640 x 480). When you upload the pictures to your laptop or PC, Photo Manager automatically enhances your images using digital interpolation to 1.3 million pixels.

  33. Sort of like Mind Reading by serutan · · Score: 2, Insightful

    One of the topics that came up late one night in college was what life would be like if everybody was highly telepathic. You would have little if any privacy, and it would be impossible to lie to anybody. So politics and personal relationships would be radically different from what they are. It strikes me that the potential to be recorded in detail at any time might have a big impact on society. People could carry these things around to cover their asses or gather blackmail material. Crooked politicians would be unable to trust anybody, which might be a good thing. In fact, the degree to which our lawmakers freak out about this particular technology being in the public's hands is probably a good indicator of how dirty they are.

  34. Low light = no picture by TheSync · · Score: 3, Informative

    I have one of the early thumb drive/camera combos. I notice that many of them need a lot of light to take a picture. Mine won't even let you try to take a picture in dim lighting. Outdoors, they work OK.

  35. How long until by ErichTheWebGuy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How long before we read the first story of some, um, inappropriate footage captured with one of these?

    No, the real question is, "How long until I don't get to carry around my keychain flash drive because someone thinks it's a camera?"

    --
    bash: rtfm: command not found
  36. Not me! by smchris · · Score: 2, Funny


    How long before we read the first story of some, um, inappropriate footage captured with one of these?"

    I'd only look at a KEY019 for the articles!