[Before responding to this post, would like to say that that in post Number 30 of this thread, the quote is messed up because I left off a "]" on one of the quotes. Tried to remedy it by editing, but kept getting an error message forbidding me to do so. Sorry about that!]
Hey Mr. 12H,
I may even eventually get what is being attempted here clearly delineated. Thanks for bearingwith me.
Am pretty much "deep sixing" the idea of using a Camcorder, and am attempting to turn The Crystalume into an "Electric Crystalume" utilizing a Camera made for just "seeing" or "picking-up" the Crystalume Screen Image without having to perform any other functions normally associated with Camcorders.
See Post Number 30, this thread for some of the thinking on this concept.
Will probably fabricate another "Module" that will somehow be attachable to the "Screen Module" of The Crystalume.
Here in East Texas, there are no "Public Houses". There ARE occasional "Beer Joints", but mostly they are called "Bars", "HonkyTonks", and probably in a bit more profane manner: "Meat Markets".
As mentioned above, what is here being attempted is not constrained by requiring any of the more normal criterion of which you are speaking. And if what has been found is, indeed suitable, because all the normal stuff required of a Camcorder is eliminated, it seems to significantly affect the cost/price.
We'll just have to wait and see if the thinking is valid, or if it is just a pipe-dream.
Anyway, thanks for the response. Take care.
JC
Fixed by your friendly section Moderator - whoever that might be 
Off now to have a look at your links
Mark.
OK here goes
Forget the Panasonic & Samsung cameras as they are low resolution (poor quality) and analogue so hard work to get connected to a PC.
Of the 2 InVid cameras the most expensive of the 2 is the lower resolution (although still 1080 so should be good enough) and does not look to have onboard recording option that the other one does (to SD card). Also the more expensive unit has an HD-TVI output that is not natively supported on a PC so an interface device would also be required to connect it to the PC. The cheaper one outputs a standard network signal so can connect to any PC that is on a modern network (ie on the internet via a router) and can also be powered by PoE (Power over Ethernet).
However none of the cameras include a lens, so that will also need to be purchased.
So I would say of the cameras linked to the InVid Par-P4rics is your best option.
Mark.
All right. After posting the URLs, the "Analog" term was noticed. So now I know better.
All right. In learning mode here: You say 1080 should be "good enough". Were we to get the "best" resolution, what would we be looking for? Am assuming that the higher the resolution number the better the resolution, AND that the higher the resolution, the higher the price. So not going below 1080, we want to get the HIGHEST resolution that we can afford. Right?
If we're going to record in the most DIRECT manner possible to The Scryer's HDD, we wouldn't need any on-board recording ability. What is the "most DIRECT manner possible" called?
Googled HD-TVI and got this:
"HD-TVI stands for High Definition Transport Video Interface. It is a digital signal processing and transport technology for video used in HD security cameras and DVRs. ... HD-TVI cameras currently support 1080p video resolution using the same coaxial cabling techniques used by traditional analog CCTV cameras."
Let's pass on the HD-TVI to eliminate the need for an "interface device". What should we look for instead of HD-TVI?
All right. Still in learning mode: Rather than go through a Router, or be Powered over Ethernet, what would be the simplest, most direct way to connect to a PC? Need to learn the term so that when looking for MORE CCTV Cameras, will know to ask for.
That would not be a problem (unless Lenses are REALLY expensive).
It might be BEST to HAVE to buy a Lens because we could then get one that would best fit the set up.
Something to consider: The Crystalume's Rear Projection Screen on which the Image is displayed is 35" wide X 28" high. Am thinking that a Lens that would pick up THAT size from the SHORTEST distance would be the IDEAL Lens. Would like to have the Camera Module in which the Camera will be mounted, and that is going to attach to the Front of The Crystalume's Screen Module be as SHORT as possible.
All right... So what I'm going to do now is: Armed with what has been learned so far from this exchange, am going to look for MORE CCTV Cameras to see what else is out there.
As mentioned previously, this is pretty much virgin territory. This idea is one that I've had for a long time. As far as I know, no other Lightshow Instrument has ever had anything like this. It's like when Les Paul invented the Electric Guitar!
Mark, we're making progress! It's like swimming in frozen honey, but that seems to be the way it always is. Have found that EVERYTHING happens when it's supposed to happen.
Will be back in touch soon.
Thanks for taking the time to assist. And thanks for fixing Post Number 30!
JC
Hey Mark,
Once again I have missed a "]", and it has messed up the Quote. My bad. Sorry about that.
JC
Fixed as well 
The most direct method for getting the video onto the PC is using whatever the PC has already, ie USB, firewire etc. or buying an internal card with the required connection.
Most connections would need to compress the video, but that is not a bad thing as uncompressed HD video will eat up disk space. A good compression such as h.264 or better still h.265 (as output by the best camera from above). But I would say the network connection is a good bet to use as it is a well established interface that you are almost certainly already using to get onto the internet.
Full HD video at 1080 lines is good but we now have 4K and 8K is going to be along soon. But as you say higher resolution is going to put the cost up so just go with what you consider to be good enough to capture the effect.
And yes being able to buy the right lens for the job is good - as long as it is not stupid money and of course that they make one that does what you want.
Mark.
Just been looking at the lenses on the site you linked to for the cameras. Most of the lens are very wide angle, not really surprising for a CCTV camera. But this is not really what I would think you want, the human eye sees the equivalent to approx. 50mm and lower numbers mean wider. So try standing at a distance from the screen so it fills your field of vision. Would this be about the distance you would want the camera to be?
Mark.
Hey Mr. ME19,
GREAT. Am going to have to proofread more carefully. How come I'm getting a message saying that the post can't be edited? The error is seen, it gets edited, but then when trying to save the edit, the error message appears.
The Scryer has USB, Firewire, and Ethernet. But could acqiore whatever would be required.
The Scryer has a 4TB HDD, and more could be obtained if necessary.
As far as can be told, MP4 seems to be all right. Larry Odham of QuadTapeXfer sent what was digitized off of the QuadTapes back in uncompressed, MP4, and two other formats, the names of which escape me at the moment. The videos sent to YouTube were MP4 (IIRC), and work well.
Did some research on this, and there was some amount of discussion about 2x 1080p, 4x 1080p, and one of the things noted was that the higher the 2x, 4x, 8x, number is, the more digital information there is to be processed. Am thinking that because of the nature of The Crystalume image, that terribly high definition is unnecessary. It isn't as if the image is compared in sharpness to any kind of standard. We're dealing with moving areas of color, not actual focused subjects.
Probably what you said about 1080 being "good enough" would be the way to go. After all, there's nothing to which the image will be compared as far as resolution is concerned.
The Panasonic Camcorder with the Lens completely UN-ZOOMED sees the whole Screen from about three feet away.
Anyway, am seeing another response from you to answer. See you over there.
JC
Hey Mr. ME19,
Not so sure about that. If the Lens is Very Wide Angled, it would make it possible to put it quite close to the Rear Projection Screen, if it could focus up that close.
One would be only about 24" from the Rear Projection Screen Surface! That would be GREAT, because that would mean that the NEW Camera Module that would be fabricated would be about 2'-0" deep. Easy peasy to make, and wouldn't need any kind of support. It could just "hang" on the front of The Crystalume Screen Module which is quite substantial.
Am going to put a JPG of The Crystalume here. Although it is a 3/4 Rear View, the large flared part is the Screen Module. The Camera Module would fit on the Front of the Screen Module. https://www.avforums.com/attachments/crystalume1-jpg.1033195/
There is also another factor: The Image normally occurs in the center of the screen, and most generally doesn't FILL the screen, although it can. That is only done when the image that it is emulating is approximating the size of the Audio (which in this case, LARGE would be LOUD and BRIGHT!). But, as the Crystalumist, I can move the image to any location on the Screen.
Well Mark. This is becoming clearer and clearer. Have been looking at more CCTV Cameras, but haven't found any that are much better than what has already been found. BUT, in reading the descriptions, looking up the terms, and some of the websites found even have tutorials about the cameras, am getting a bit of an education thanks to YOU and Google.
Anyway, have been sitting here too long. My ankles and feet tend to get pitting edema (swollen). Am going to have to get up and move around, or maybe lie down with my feet up. Thanks for the responses. Will be in touch.
Take care.
JC
MP4 is a container rather than a compression format. The MP4 can contain all sorts of audio & video formats such as H.264
However H.265 is the newer version and is more efficient so you can get smaller files of the same or better quality than with H.264
4x 1080 is what we know as 4K (or UHD) as it has 4x the number of pixels of a Full HD (1080) picture.
TV resolution confusion: 1080p, 2K, UHD, 4K, 8K, and what they all mean
Full HD - 1920x1080=2073600
UHD - 3840x2160=8294400
So 8294400/2073600=4 (aka 4x1080)
But also you need to take into consideration the bit rate of the image. A will look poor compared to
Again it is a maths equation 1920x1080x8 or 1920x1080x12 shows the amount of information in the picture.
I have an older 1080 camcorder and also a cheap CCTV 1080 camera. Both have the same resolution but the picture quality of the CCTV cam is very poor compared to the camcorder.
Unfortunately the box cameras you linked to did not show (as far as I can remember) the bit rate so in reality the quality of the output is hard to say.
Mark.