resolution

[secboy]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

I've totally lost the plot with this !!! mega pixel cameras/military gear/ still cameras/cameras used at the dome/special lenses/control of lenses/pc control/I wonder if I'm to old to retrain as a plummer????????????????? banghead .Paul.

[robert99d]

I was sent a demo cd a couple of months ago about a camera that used a mirror to scan the area covered to get high resolution images

Used the same technology as military planes and satellites

I

[Guest fathead]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

I've totally lost the plot with this !!! mega pixel cameras/military gear/ still cameras/cameras used at the dome/special lenses/control of lenses/pc control/I wonder if I'm to old to retrain as a plummer????????????????? banghead .Paul.

51320[/snapback]

Sorry to hear that,

I was sure you got it, right at the start.

Some others here posting stuff that indicates they don't have a scooby what I am on about.

Your own post on the low frame rate is the sort of thing that is very useful in helping to clarify.

This is an idea that needs criticism from all angles to see if it stands up.

So far it looks like the only other way of getting that high res shot from a distance while covering a wide field of view is a high res IP cam.

[Guest fathead]

I was sent a demo cd a couple of months ago about a camera that used a mirror to scan the area covered to get high resolution images

Used the same technology as military planes and satellites

I

[robert99d]

Found it

sentryscope

Looks quite good and expensive

[ian.cant]

Ive had to read this a few times so i can sort of get my head round whats been typed, ive now got a few points to raise!

A common problem: monitoring a car park or driveway entrance some distance from the nearest position where you can fix the camera. You may be able to capture some video of someone breaking into a car but you have little chance of being able to identify the villain.

This would mainly be because the wrong type of CCTV system was installed somewhere along the line, usually due to costs, very rare to find the right kind of money being spent to achieve required objectives. Take car parks for example, even well placed statics will struggle to see everything. Use the correct fully functional domes and a trained operator then you will greatly increase detection rates. As for identifying the villan, in most cases the use of video evidence will result in a guilty plea rather than a not guilty plea without it.

It appears that over 90% of the video submitted as evidence is inadmissible due to the poor quality of the images.

I would like to know where you get your figure for this one, if 90% were correct then we would'nt be fitting CCTV as much as we do.

Looking at the spec on DVRs it becomes obvious that the frame rate has to be dropped to single figures to cope with data from many cameras. I am left wondering if this can really be called video. You might as well be taking a series of still pictures.

Not true, good quality pro kit will cope quite well, its again down to the right camera/lens being used for the job/location/situation.

Reviewing current alternatives it seems that the future will be IP cameras. High res ones are available but are frighteningly expensive.

IP camera's may well be the future, who knows(I still thinks its gonna be garlic bread), colour CCD camera's were frighteningly expensive at one time, now they aint.

So what I am looking for is something like a webcam that gives high-resolution single images and forget the video. Or an IP cam without all the video electronics. I would keep my video cameras to record the whole scene, to get the whole story of an event, but add the stills cameras to get those high-resolution shots required for identification.

How do you propose to get THE incident if your camera isnt poiting at it or isnt close enough to make the image usable? If you plan on manually zooming your MP camera then surely you would be just as well to use a good quality video camera and lens with an operator?

What you gonna do when its dark or in shadow or the sun is behind the incident?

[Guest fathead]

sorry still don't think you get it

I am talking about a solution to the car park problem

for around £250

[Guest fathead]

Found it

sentryscope

Looks quite good and expensive

51341[/snapback]

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Absolutely awesome Robert.

Did you take a look at the sample images?

10,000 X 2000 jpeged down to only 1.6 Mb so a lot of compression used

but check the image quality.

save them out, open in XP picture viewer and zoom in.

It is a good example of what you can do with a high res still picture.

At 21megapixel though this one is going to cost a fortune .

What a piece of kit though.

Wonder if it comes with that big bug eye.

[secure4]

I didnt say anything about it being an IP camera, infact as far as I know they output as a video feed. Frame rate, and the recording of it is down to the equipment that you are using to record the image. Mega Pixel or not.

If you can get a still camera to take 25 photos a second then you've got realtime video.

[ian.cant]

sorry still don't think you get it

I am talking about a solution to the car park problem

for around £250

51366[/snapback]

Ok maybe i dont get it, but i know your not going to sell anything that can do what your saying for £250!

Oh and you didnt answer the points i raised?

The sentry scope looks very good, it was on show at IFSEC last year, ive never seen or heard of one deployed up this way and i suspect thats because its Very Very expensive.