My god! You're still at it!! This is now day 5 of this nonsense and despite all that has been said you are still arguing about what will work or won't work based upon a casual remark I made about IR flash photography last Thursday. This obsessive behavior is beginning to border on the pathological.
Unlike you, there are people out there who actually go to the trouble of exploring what actually will or will not work rather than act like a self appointed pundit who can only speculate and theorize. As it happens there is even an entire
DIY Trailcam community where enthusiasts engage in all kinds of fascinating IR projects and experiments, including IR video capture. Some projects are even built on a Raspberry Pi platform that offers all sorts of unique and interesting control, shutter timing and PIR sensor triggering capabilities. There are even suppliers who provide components and control circuitry for IR trailcam builds, so indeed an intrepid DIYer could potentially build a camera that would accomplish what the OP is seeking.
As for having "experience" I don't particularly care what kind of amateur video editing experience you may have. It's irrelevant. You seem to be in the chronic habit of trying to divert the subject matter away from the actual discussion and this is no different. When I speak of having
experience I'm referring to people here on DCT who have put an enormous amount of time and energy into evaluating aftermarket lenses or performing camera modifications or engaging in DIY projects and posting their results and direct experiences whereas you who have zero hands on experience doing anything of this nature but feel it's necessary to lecture us about things you've only read about on the internet.
Speaking of diverting the subject matter, it's amusing to see you accuse me of attacking you and then playing the victim. How could the alleged attacker be the victim?...In the same sentence, no less! Gee, I thought you were playing the victim as I pointed out in the post you are responding to.
Seems you are trying to flip the narrative here. The same goes for accusing me of "jumping in" to your commentary when it's generally the other way around such as in this very thread where you've spent five days "jumping in" with challenges to a simple comment I made about some experiments I might like to try. Generally speaking, I tend to attempt to ignore you but end up entangled in these pointless and tedious arguments with you when you quote me and then launch into one of your clueless explanations based on things you only know vicariously from the internet and then speculate about.
As for whether you were "scamming" Viofo for free cameras, perhaps that may not have been the best choice of words but obviously everyone can reach their own conclusions about what to call it.
You persuaded Viofo to send you a WR1 to review, a camera that is known to ONLY be operated and controlled via the dedicated WiFi smartphone APP, only to reveal upon receiving the camera that you don't own a smartphone or any other suitable WiFi device so therefore there would be no way to conduct a comprehensive and thorough evaluation of the camera as no doubt Viofo was likely anticipating when you approached them for a sample camera or that potential buyers might expect to see in an actual "review". WiFi control and viewing on the WR1 was the
primary feature that distinguished this unique, small, screenless camera. It is hard to fathom that someone would offer to review a camera where they know in advance that they would be unable to evaluate or demonstrate its KEY functionality. There's far more to what prospective buyers want to know about a camera's functionality beyond the default settings or performance.
And then when you got Viofo to provide you with an A129 Duo for review, once the camera was in your possession
you announced that you were not going to do any review of the camera's actual performance in operation, "
because I prefer suction mounts and this new camera is adhesive mounts only". Yet this is a wedge shaped camera, a common design that is widely known as intended for installation directly on the glass with 3M VHB tape and you knew that going into it. As a dual channel camera it wouldn't ship with a suction mount, regardless. So, once again, you procured an evaluation sample that you knew in advance you were never going to review. And what's the big deal about using the 3M VHB tape, even temporarily so you could perform the review? Many of us do this all the time. In the last 8 years I've installed and removed dozens of 3M VHB tape mounted cameras. It's no big deal. Call it what you will but everyone else around here who solicits free cameras from manufacturers for the purpose of conducting a review actually reviews them. Like I said, members reading this narrative can come up with their own word to characterize the practice of not following through with what you offer or agree to.
As for unboxing videos, they tend to make me nauseous, especially ones that spend an inordinate amount of time and energy evaluating the box it was shipped in and how much f**king packing tape they used.
This is a camera sold by numerous vendors all over the world and all vendors will have their own packing techniques, so reviewing how much packing tape an individual worker at one company decided to use tells viewer nothing useful worthy of their time.
So let's see. You've been at this for 5 days now. Are you going to go for 6...or longer? I'll bet if I eventually come back with some successful IR flash imagery you might have a stroke and get taken out on a stretcher!