Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Ability to Zoom-in on area's.

  1. #1

    Question Ability to Zoom-in on area's.

    I would like to post a question to Chiefgeek & the Metageek programmers,

    While, this question would probably be better suited for the Chanalyzer v3.4 forum, since v4 is its successor I will post it here instead. And since so many people have asked for this ability, I would like to continue the discussion.

    If/when the ability to control Chanalyzer's Step, Res BW, Sweep-time, are put back into chanalyzer 4 like in 3.4, I still do not understand why, (Trent for instance, has said that):
    Chanalyzer is showing the recording at the highest resolution. Being able to zoom into a recording is like like zooming into an image and expecting the pixels to magically increase as you go. Adding this feature reminds me of those CSI shows that can magically enhance anything: CSI Enhance
    you cannot zoom into an image if all the information is already recorded there.?

    After using the script and seeing all the information that has been recorded on a file using say (Step: 25.391kHz, ResBW: 58.036kHz) at 2400-2500MHz it appears to me that the information is already recorded well enough to be able to decipher it, and allow it to be "zoomed" in on without the "CSI Enhance" effect.

    When the real-time spectrum line is shown and you see the line basically stepping over itself, (see image) Click image for larger version. 

Name:	2400-2500 max resolution.jpg 
Views:	327 
Size:	91.0 KB 
ID:	207 I do not understand how this is (in anyway) simply zooming into a defunct image and trying to "Enhance" it.

    So far, the response from Metageek has been that it is just zooming into an image which would just make the pixels bigger, I simply disagree. As you can see in the image there is PLENTY of space (and precision) between the recorded points, for a zoomed in view to be accurate, precise, and to still not be impossible.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	2400-2500 max resolution2.jpg 
Views:	342 
Size:	92.9 KB 
ID:	208

    I challenge the Metageek team to simply take that section of recorded spectrum and allow it to be played without seeing the previous or later sections of the spectrum line. You would not have to even specifically crop out that part of the recording, as since the data points are already there, you just have to tell chanalyzer to Ignore the parts before and after (whatever you want to see) the section to be displayed on the graphics/histogram/topographic view. (ok well it's kinda like cropping it but not entirely)

    Any responses and discussion on this would be greatly appreciated!



  2. Default

    Okay, I think I understand where you're coming from.

    Suppose the user's screen resolution isn't high enough to accommodate the resolution of the Wi-Spy - similar to a 7 mega pixel image being shrunk down to be shown on your laptop display - it won't display the recording at the resolution captured. To see what Oxygen is saying, try shrinking Chanalyzer's window to the smallest size possible.

    I recreated what his specifications (the highest resolution possible with a Wi-Spy DBx) and shrunk the window to a smaller size. For those of you with large monitors at your desk feel free to open the recording I have attached and view it yourself

    The constraint is not a built-in function of Chanalyzer, but is a limitation of the user's display resolution.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	highest res possible.png 
Views:	314 
Size:	179.5 KB 
ID:	210

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	highest res possible2.jpg 
Views:	301 
Size:	142.8 KB 
ID:	211

    For the resolution Oxygen is asking for, it will take a long time to sweep across the 2.4 GHz band (4 seconds or so). While the resolution is high, it is very likely this is too slow. Which is why we added the session feature into chanalyzer 4. Now you can zoom and have each hw configuration in a unified recording without compromising sweep time. I admit you'd be compromising MHz ranges outside of the configuration - which is why I will give you two possible solutions.

    Use Chanalyzer 4 and SQLite Manager for FireFox. You'll be able to edit the .wsx recording and remove the frequencies you don't want to view.

    Use Chanalyzer 3 and use Didier's wsrtool. I do not know how to use his tool, but I do know it will crop the frequency range of the recording you wish to view.
    Attached Files Attached Files

  3. #3


    Thanks Trent,

    I don't have much experience programming so it may take me a little while to try out the SQLite & wsrtool which is a python file. However, I am really glad that I have been able to get the point across that zooming really is a viable idea, especially to old recordings. It would be a great bit easier to be able to actually do it in chanalyzer though as the analysis can already take a lot of time. But, I thank you for the link to Didier's tool. I had heard of something like that, but was unable to find the tool that was talked about.

    Yes, it really is the limitation of the monitor (resolution) that is the factor, because if I had a monitor 5 feet wide I could probably see all the information I want to look at closer. I don't necessarily want to always use the MAX step rate. That was just a good example of how the data is present, but not able to see it correctly on the screen.

    I have found that there really are times that using a very high (or small) step rate is necessary to analyze a large range even when it take sometimes up to 10 secs to do a sweep. At 5 GHz I have always seen signals around the 5.0-5.25 GHz. It turns out that after much analysis and review, I believe the signals I am picking up are the radio-navigation system for "Microwave Landing System" (MLS). A newer variant of the older "Intelligent Landing Systems" (ILS) for planes/airports. I thought it might be my computer or usb interference, but have isolated that out. Then I thought it might be video transmitters, but the bandwidth is too small, and the patterns actually have a particular "pulse rate" of roughly 5-6/10sec. Researching this further with a frequency chart, the FAA, and correlating the results with a survey's 40 miles away, I found out that the FAA runs their MLS on the frequencies from 5000-5250 MHz.

    MLS uses pulses as well as regular NWS radar units. The small step allowed me to accurately see the pulses happening, once I had resolved that the bandwidth of the device was very small.

    This is a perfect example of where I had to spend DAYS doing recordings because I had to do recordings very high in resolution, and then zoom into the range, try to look closer & closer to each individual topograph view by re-recording it each time. It took days to get good resolutions and be able to tell that it was not USB interference, ect.. A simple zoom-in function would have remedied this time required, when I recorded it at a small Step to begin with. And it may have lessened the interpretation time.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	4900-6000 scan (high res).jpg 
Views:	336 
Size:	90.3 KB 
ID:	227

    Since this is within the "regular 5GHz" scan for chanalyzer 3 & 4 or basically the unlicensed 802.11a equipment, I needed to figure out what I was actually seeing on the scan. I also tend to see NWS radar as well in the 5475MHz range, but havn't yet figured out which radar unit in my area is causing the signal as the closest TWR is 100+ miles away.

    Just thought I'd give people a view on how I have been using things with long sweep times.

    Last edited by oxygen69; 09-05-2010 at 05:22 AM. Reason: picture added

Tags for this Thread


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts