This is what I find ridiculous. Is there any real value in NOT hardwiring the camera power to the LED? Consumers should demand that the camera light not be under software control and that it always reflect the true power state of the camera. Something similar should be done with the microphone. There is no excuse for a situation where I have to put tape on my camera.
> There is no excuse for a situation where I have to put tape on my camera.
And yet, we happen to live in a world where practically no customer has the needed expertise to verify for themselves if the LED reflects the true state of the camera or not, and if they had it they'd not care any less. A world where corporations misuse technology to betray customer's confidence and break the law, and when those get caught, get away with no more than a slap in the hand (as in the VW emission control hack case).
So, what are you going to do about it? Throw a tantrum because you exist in Earth instead of Heaven, or work out a solution that you can implement yourself without need of consensus from the ignorant masses or permission from their corrupt leadership?
In addition to the attacks that others have mentioned here, I've also heard folks comment previously on the possibility of turning on the camera very briefly, just long enough for a single still shot. If it was done fast enough, the brief flicker of the LED might not be noticeable.
(Like you, I had always assumed that the power for the webcam was literally in series with the LED, so that disabling the LED would render the camera inoperable. That seemed like the obvious way to do it if you wanted to provide a truly reliable signal. But evidently that's not the case.)
Perhaps you mean in parallel. An LED is driven by 20 mA, whereas a camera requires more like 200 mA, so it's not feasible to wire them in series - either the LED will burn out or the camera won't power up.
Yeah, I was pretty sure I was being a little sloppy by using the term "series" (for shame, physics prof, for shame!), but I was hoping to evoke the general sense of "if current doesn't flow through the LED for any reason, the camera can't turn on." Honestly, I'm not 100% certain offhand of a way to wire that (which is why I didn't want to be specific earlier, despite using a specific term: shoulda added some weasel words :) ). Do the LED and the camera run off of the same voltage? (If not, then parallel wiring won't work, either.)
>I had always assumed that the power for the webcam was literally in series with the LED
If I were tasked with making a webcam circuit, I'd make sure the light and the sensor were always powered together. So I (naively) assumed that's how everyone would do it.
Maybe you could add a capacitor to keep the LED going for a bit longer after the power cuts. The power off dimming might be aesthetically pleasing too.
From a user perspective it is hard to know whether the webcam LED is software controlled. If it is software controlled, e.g. by the webcam driver, it is prone to manipulation and could remain off while the webcam is recording.
Of course, there are many cameras that do not even have an activity indiator (LED), e.g. stand-alone cameras, or simply your phone front and back camera. I find it a good habit to cover all cameras, regardless of wether they have an indicator.
Yes, LEDs are just connected by gpio. It is cheaper than doing something like parallel or serial led connections (i.e. on the power wire) since the chips come with a few extra gpio balls.
