VIOFO А119V3 FIRMWARE

[wolfyk]

@vvs49 I'm also using your 2.5 mod firmware and I'm more interested to read license plates during night driving, which settings to use in this case?

HDR on/off?
EV Exposure?
FPS?
other useful settings in this case?

PS: my resolution is 2560x1440 and CPL fitted

 

[vvs49]

I compressed videos just to have smaller size.

I asked to show the original video !!

 

[vvs49]

HDR on/off?
EV Exposure?
FPS?

HDR ON
EV = -1/3(And if the headlights are halogen, then EV = +1/3)
FPS = 30

 

[gse]

Anyhow even on original it's the same, license plates are not readable during night.

The firmware does not give a 100% result of the readability of numbers at night, it will be 50/50, there are many factors for this.
It is not necessary to pinch the video, the original is required to assess the quality. Nobody, anywhere, ever, promised the readability of numbers at night, take this as a bonus from the enthusiasts of romodels.
For best results, you should move in the leftmost lane.

 

[McLaren__F1]

This user is using v2.6 FW

 

[Kremmen]

From my testing I've setup for the best daytime footage and freeze frame captures. As a result nightime will be what it is as I'm not changing the settings each time I go out in light or dark

For me HDR On and EV -1/3 produces image blur in screen captures. EV - 1/3 darkens the daytime footage slightly too much for my liking. I tried EV + 1/3 for daytime and it slightly washed out the footage. EV 0 seems to be the sweet spot.

I may be driving in the dark on Sunday morning and I've set my LED headlights to their lowest setting for my next test run.

I think trying to capture reflective number plates on unlit roads with a minimum closing speed of 60mph + just isn't going to happen.

 

[vvs49]

This user is using v2.6 FW

Where does this firmware come from, why is VIOFO silent?

 

[Kremmen]

I think 2.5 was only in a blog post link a long time before it got released officially.

 

[vvs49]

I think 2.5 was only

In the video, the firmware is v2.6 FW and it is clearly different from the last one !!
I haven't seen her on the blog, maybe I looked badly.
Can VIOFO answer?

 

[Mtz]

The firmware is 2.6T. T means for tests. That video is to show how is looking the 21:9 4K video resolution (as requested by me in this thread). So Viofo applied a request. I consider is more usable 4K 21:9 instead of 4K 4:3: I really don't understand who is requesting a 4:3 aspect ratio and for what is good such aspect ratio.
Maybe Viofo considered that is not so important to release a new firmware for just a resolution added.

enjoy,
Mtz

 

[vvs49]

The firmware is 2.6T. T

It's clear, it's not clear where is the firmware itself for the tests?

 

[Kremmen]

The firmware is 2.6T. T means for tests. That video is to show how is looking the 21:9 4K video resolution (as requested by me in this thread). So Viofo applied a request. I consider is more usable 4K 21:9 instead of 4K 4:3: I really don't understand who is requesting a 4:3 aspect ratio and for what is good such aspect ratio.
Maybe Viofo considered that is not so important to release a new firmware for just a resolution added.

enjoy,
Mtz

I used to use 21:9 in my old car and it was fine. In my new car it doesn't work. With the slightly different windscreen angle of the new car the vertical alignment was too high and as a result the footage was very dark because the auto EV cut in too aggressively.

I clicked it down to the next angle and it just looked all wrong, no sky and too much dash which looks silly in 21:9

I opened it up to 4:3 and with the lower angle the sky is perfect and the extra dash is acceptable. More crucial the auto EV is perfect.

I'm sure if the vertical alignment wasn't on a ratchet I could have found the sweet spot but the ratchet clicks were too far apart.

 

[Mtz]

If EV is not correct for 21:9 Viofo should fix it. I didnt observed what you what you say but I will look more carefully into this problem when adjusting the lens angle.

It's clear, it's not clear where is the firmware itself for the tests?

It is from Viofo for sure. Viofo can send firmware to some testers, it is not a rule to offer it to everybody because it is a firmware for tests. When will be ready Viofo will offer to everybody.

enjoy,
MTz

 

[Kremmen]

What I determined is that with 21:9 the black bars are just put in later. The EV sensor is still looking at the area in the top black bar which would come under the frequent posts "Too much sky, lower the angle"

 

[Mtz]

The black bars are not added.
The image is cropped.
If black bars were added the the AR should remain 16:9 and not 21:9. If you will analyze the original video from the Youtube description you will see that I am right.
So your theory about black bars influencing the exposure is not right. Also the exposure should not be affected (in theory) because the cropping is made at the same level from the top and from the bottom. But maybe in reality, cropping a 16:9 image to 21:9 is affecting also the exposure table. This needs more testing and reports. Personally I didn't observed any major difference from 16:9 to 21:9 exposure, but I will look closely.

enjoy,
Mtz

 

[Kremmen]

I didn't notice any difference on my previous car either but this one, the ratchet is just at the wrong angle. Shame as I liked the letterbox look.

I can confirm that I did quite a bit of testing and I've had to go back to full 2560x1440 to get the lighting right.

I'm happy with it though.

 

[vvs49]

When will be ready Viofo will offer to everybody.

I would prefer a resolution of 3840x1600, this resolution works great in my previous mods firmware

 

[Mtz]

You already know that everything over 1440p is interpolated and the resolution can be marked as fake.
Why to increase also the 1440p 2K vertical resolution to 1600p and in this way to become even more fake?
Why to waste Bitrate on motor hood or on the sky?
In video encoding a quality parameter is named Bits/(pixel*frame). The old program called GSpot was calling this factor as QF (quality factor) and was easy to talk about QF. If you will add more resolution but keep the Bitrate the same because the chipset can't support more, that added pixels will lower the video quality over all image.
In above video the value is 0.215 which is an OK value. The bigger the value, the lower the quality of the video. So when you will judge a video, first take a look in Mediainfo for the value of Bits/(pixel*frame) and if is higher than 0.215 then expect a lower video quality than the 4K 21:9 video from V3.

As we can see at many dashcams a big video resolution is not a guaranteed video quality. Many 4K dashcams have poor quality video compared to other 2K dashcams. To put a 4K resolution on a 2K chipset or CMOS is just only to sell more to the people which are judging a camera just because of its maximum resolution. That people are happy because are recording in 4K even their videos are poor.

In dashcam world only when we will have bigger CMOS we will have better video quality,
Until then will be some fights and comparisons about minimal differences between brands and usually the difference is only because of quality of the lens,

enjoy,
Mtz

 

[vvs49]

Why to increase also the 1440p 2K vertical resolution to 1600p

The vertical viewing angle does not change from this, as the aspect ratio of 21: 9 remained.
The user does not need these permissions.
Any interpolation spoils the picture.

FIRMWARE V2.6T is online !!

FW V2.6T

drive.google.com

The user does not use extensions.
After downloading, add .bin = FWA119V3.bin

 

[McLaren__F1]

Here's v2.6T with the .bin extension from the PDA site with photos

FWA119V3.bin

View and download from Yandex Disk

disk.yandex.com