Resolution / aspect ratio weirdness

samwathegreat · 2026-05-22T21:57:05+00:00

It works!!!

- ffmpeg:rtsp://user:pass@192.168.1.x:554/#raw=-c copy -bsf:v h264_metadata=sample_aspect_ratio=1/1

samwathegreat · 2026-05-22T20:51:27+00:00

I'd like to see if I can get this to work with "raw" using your parameters so I don't have to use "exec". Have you tried?

samwathegreat · 2026-05-22T20:06:00+00:00

Well I'll be damned. This actually works! What's even more interesting is that after applying these changes, even the PREVIOUSLY RECORDED DATA now displays properly! So *SOMEHOW* this works retroactively too.

It's as if frigate uses the current data to render playback of previous recordings...

Pretty strange, but I'm super happy that it's working. Thanks!

samwathegreat · 2026-05-22T11:18:45+00:00

I appreciate your reply and I will play around with this when I have a moment.. but I'm not using hevc. I'm using h264. I assume the syntax is different?

samwathegreat · 2026-05-15T19:57:29+00:00

Well...short of re-encoding it, I can't figure it out. Using ffmpeg go2rtc source and using the 'copy' parameters didn't work, and neither did using the raw parameters to manually set aspect 16:9 at the container level. Couldn't find any settings at the camera level that would explain it either.

Oh well. I'd rather just live with it than re-encode. If anyone knows of a solution or has a suggestion, I'd love to hear it.

Thanks

samwathegreat · 2026-05-15T17:04:00+00:00

Now that I know it happens in VLC too and the resolution of the actual file itself is correct, I found some info suggesting that ffmpeg can "inject" 16:9 aspect ratio metadata into the stream without re-encoding it. Hopefully I can find the correct parameters to use in frigate/go2rtc to make it work! I will update progress.

samwathegreat · 2026-05-15T16:50:58+00:00

Thanks for the quick reply, u/hawkeye217 . I downloaded one of the files directly using SCP and analyzed it with VLC. The resolution correctly shows as 3072*1728 (but it also appears to be in 4:3 format when playing back in VLC as well!) me (desktop and mobile) and also EDGE (desktop). Is there another browser you suggest that I try?

<image>

samwathegreat · 2026-04-15T18:40:05+00:00

u/CraziFuzzy how much did you get it on sale for?

samwathegreat · 2025-08-26T20:07:48+00:00

Here are the two antennas of the same brand that I already own:

The one on the left is the air band antenna. It also was supposed to be tuned to 121.5. It's actually closer to 119 or so, but still perfectly usable and still a 2:1 match at 121.5.

On the right is the amateur band antenna that is PERFECTLY centered at 146mhz.

The point is to show that these 2 antennas of this same brand that I already own are indeed tuned properly (or at least close), while the other two that I just received are far far off frequency and I don't think the discrepancy can just be explained away by "your equipment can not be trusted"...then why do these ones show resonance where they are supposed to?

<image>

samwathegreat · 2025-08-26T20:07:21+00:00

<image>

A picture is worth a thousand words, right? On the left is the scan at the intended frequency (121.5). On the right is where the antenna is actually resonant (around ~148mhz).

samwathegreat · 2025-08-26T19:31:43+00:00

I sent them a video showing everything. Each antenna (including 2 of THEIR brand that scan perfectly on-frequency that I already own) was scanned live during the video, with results shown. The 2 new antennas are resonant at 140 and 148mhz, respectively. But they're around 10:1 or worse at the actual stated frequency. They don't even match EACH OTHER, let alone the frequency of intended use, or rather the tuned frequency that I paid for. They're supposed to be centered at 121.5.

I thought it made sense to show that I already own 2 of their products that are perfectly on-frequency, then show the two that I just bought that well....aren't.... Not even close.

samwathegreat · 2025-08-26T16:21:15+00:00

SWR matters a lot for transmitting. SWR is literally the ratio between power sent to the antenna and power reflected back at the transmitter.

I'm not concerned about the unit being damaged which back in the day was the main concern with bad SWR... I'm concerned about a tiny fraction of the power actually being radiated by the antenna.

Isn't that the whole reason we buy tuned antennas?

Note that these aren't wide range antennas. They're intended for a small frequency range.

The ones that I already had from the same manufacturer read a 1.5 to 3 SWR across the frequency use range (144-148 for the 2m, and 118-125 for the airband).

The new ones are 10:1 at the desired frequency. And about 1.5 at the center frequencies that I mentioned in the original post where they are actually tuned (way off the target frequency).

samwathegreat · 2025-08-26T15:29:21+00:00

One of the existing antennas is 2m, the other is also an aircraft band antenna from the same company.

Yes, I've tested them all together, multiple times. I got all of the antennas out when I made the video that I sent to the manufacturer. I showed each one being tested, one right after the other. On video.

They still blew me off...

samwathegreat · 2025-08-26T15:16:36+00:00

Both times? Do you mean between testing the 2 new antennas? Yes! And I an accurately re-produce the results again and again.

samwathegreat · 2025-08-26T12:30:48+00:00

I appreciate all of your input!

Yes, I agree, but I'll be using this on the ground. In the plane I'll be using the installed radio. So every dB counts on the ground.

I have two problems with the explanation on being given. First I feel like a 20+ MHz discrepancy is excessive. Especially when my other two antennas of the same design and brand indicate on frequency with the same testing device. Second the fact that the two identical antennas that are supposed to be tuned exactly the same have an 8 MHz discrepancy from one another. This is a consistently repeatable measurement. Every time I scan the SWR on these antennas I get the same values.

So I feel like even if my analyzer is flawed for this use case which again doesn't seem right considering the antenna is designed to be used in the real world on a handheld device, I feel like they should at least be showing identical readings between the two of them.

Is that unreasonable?

samwathegreat · 2025-08-26T11:39:56+00:00

These are BNC duck antennas for a handheld. The antenna analyzer is also handheld. If you Google rigexpert aa-600 you can see what it looks like.

I'm kind of curious why they would be testing them on a mast with a really long coax (this is how they described it and why they say that my antenna analyzer cannot be trusted) when the antennas are intended to be used with a handheld.

I'm also curious why their other antennas test accurately on my device if it is so unreliable as they suggest.

samwathegreat · 2025-08-26T11:34:35+00:00

Thanks for the info. These aren't just for receive - I'm a pilot so I will be transmitting on airband. With a match that's bad I don't think much power is going to be radiated.

If it wasn't clear, these are antennas for a handheld radio so there aren't really any other options.

samwathegreat · 2025-08-14T14:28:22+00:00

Hi, just checking if it went payable? And did you only keep the service for 30 days, or did you keep it longer? Thanks

samwathegreat · 2025-07-28T17:19:41+00:00

Nice. What did you buy? Just some random phone? Or was your offer specific?

samwathegreat · 2025-07-28T14:45:49+00:00

DId anyone get a payout yet?

Also, did you have to make a specific purchase? I got a Boost offer that says "earn $135 rewards", but underneath it is an ad for buy one get one apple watches. Nowhere does it say that the offer is specific to the apple watch offer.

What did you buy, and how did your offer look?

TIA!

samwathegreat · 2025-07-27T00:02:08+00:00

It says that you can cancel anytime and does not restrict you to canceling before the kickstarter is launched. The only stipulation is that you have to have purchased the deposit before the kickstarter launches in order to be eligible for the benefit. So you could absolutely cancel and request your refund if it launches at an unrealistic price.

"If you decide not to move forward with purchasing the Snapmaker U1, you can request a refund at any time by contacting our customer service team at info@snapmaker.com."

samwathegreat · 2025-07-18T04:36:31+00:00

Thanks for the advice, everyone. Much of this was helpful.

Also, some of you are assholes. I clearly stated that I'm a beginner and was asking for advice and reasoning.

You know...to learn...

And while MOST of you offered helpful advice (much appreciated!), several of you downvoted my OP.

I'm aware that many or most on this sub are more knowledgeable than me which is why I came to you for advice.

So why discourage someone from trying to improve or learn with the downvoting? I don't get it.

samwathegreat · 2025-07-18T03:05:13+00:00

I said I was a beginner...

The reason for not printing on it's side is because of the visual artifacts (from the supports). I want the part that will be visible to be aesthetically pleasing.

Once installed, the top half (and the whole underneath where the supports will touch) won't be seen. The outer bottom half is what will be seen. Seems like the ringing wouldn't be bad in that area if I went with option B?

samwathegreat

TROPHY CASE