Guest fathead Posted May 4, 2005 Posted May 4, 2005 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. 51369[/snapback] --------------------------------------------------------------------- My apologies for misunderstanding This is new to me Are you saying you have a 5 megapixel analogue camera? What type of cable do you use for the camera feed and what do you record it on? not sure what your second point is - a 5megapixel digital camera at 25 frames per second will produce too much data for a PC system to handle.
Guest fathead Posted May 5, 2005 Posted May 5, 2005 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. 51371[/snapback] -------------------------------------------------------------- Please accept my apologies, did not mean to cause offense. I am doing my best to try and answer all I can on my own. -------------------------------- Your point about video evidence bringing about a guilty plea I can confirm from very recent experience. The 90% figure was given to me by the CPS and the police with regard to the same case
baywatch Posted May 5, 2005 Posted May 5, 2005 I've seen the Sitesentry to, about £12,000 for a car park system, 1 camera.
Guest fathead Posted May 5, 2005 Posted May 5, 2005 I've seen the Sitesentry to, about £12,000 for a car park system, 1 camera. 51382[/snapback] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- not surprising at 21megapixel with that field of view. only other way of getting that field with that resolution would be to use several high res digital stills cameras each taking in a section of the view. That would still be cheaper than anything else I can think of.
secboy Posted May 5, 2005 Posted May 5, 2005 Chears fathead!,I thoughT i had got the gist of what you meant but when everyone was going off in all sorts of directions i thought i had slipped into a parallel universe and started to look for that gorgeous samatha carter (drible drible). Can I pull us all back to base? You are suggesting that there are a hell of a lot of different types of camera offered by loads of manufacturers doing roughly the same job off the shelf and some not very well-Yes? You there fore are suggesting that if the technology used for digital cameras was adapted for use on cctv systems you would need a smaller range and be able to achieve a better quality picture -Yes Because this technology is in the market already and its cost is now coming down all the time,you think it would be a good idea for the industry to develope on the back bone of digital camera technology therefore developing fully functional control and video storage and replay which would use this technology-Yes Improved video quality at a reasonable cost?-yes If thats all correct ? what does everyone think of the idea now? Is it a good one? pAUL.
Guest fathead Posted May 5, 2005 Posted May 5, 2005 Chears fathead!,I thoughT i had got the gist of what you meant but when everyone was going off in all sorts of directions i thought i had slipped into a parallel universe and started to look for that gorgeous samatha carter (drible drible).Can I pull us all back to base? You are suggesting that there are a hell of a lot of different types of camera offered by loads of manufacturers doing roughly the same job off the shelf and some not very well-Yes? You there fore are suggesting that if the technology used for digital cameras was adapted for use on cctv systems you would need a smaller range and be able to achieve a better quality picture -Yes Because this technology is in the market already and its cost is now coming down all the time,you think it would be a good idea for the industry to develope on the back bone of digital camera technology therefore developing fully functional control and video storage and replay which would use this technology-Yes Improved video quality at a reasonable cost?-yes If thats all correct ? what does everyone think of the idea now? Is it a good one? pAUL. 51384[/snapback] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Yes, yes,yes, yes and almost Just one thing, forget about trying to do it as video. It is just a stills camera taking still pictures but at very high resolution. If you agree that very high-resolution still images are very useful for surveillance -then you have got the point of it all. If you insist on it being high
Doktor Jon Posted May 5, 2005 Posted May 5, 2005 Strewth, I turn my back for five minutes, and look what happens The argument may be about technical issues, but the bottom line is more about money and knowledge. A few years after CCD imagers were first introduced, one manufacturer came up with a 750 line 2/3" CCD B/W camera which was something like £ 2k+ at that time. Did it sell? did it heck, just way too expensive for what was then a very juvenile market. Loads of 330 / 380 line basic cameras are still sold by the shed load simply because they are dirt cheap to manufacture, and not because they are necessarily right for the job. Existing CCD's are used in the broadcast industry at resolutions we can only dream about (the chip costs are a bit of a nightmare mind), and yet it's only relatively recently that 520 - 535 lines colour has become available in the marketplace at easily affordable prices. If manufacturers had gone the route of developing lower cost higher resolution imagers we'd all be very happy bunnies, but as with most things in life, technology is often manufactured as a compromise. In general terms, increasing resolution will often lead to a decrease in imager sensitivity, so you could have really sharp pictures which are then rendered almost unusable by rocketing noise levels under poor lighting. If you scale a high res. 1/3" chip density up to 1/2", you then get an extremely high res. imager with good sensitivity, at a price that perhaps only Town Centre managers would be prepared to pay. There have been some quite spectacular imagers around for some time, but compromising their performance has often resulted in a product with a very limited market potential. If it were technically possible for multi megapixel cameras to be streamed in real time with excellent sensitivity and good Infra red response, and at an affordable price, we wouldn't much care whether it was analogue, DSP, IP or baked bean tin technology, we'd all be queing up to get our hands on them. The future is almost upon us, it's just up to the manufacturers to take the brave step of pushing the boundaries that little bit further and a bit, rather than simply trying to compete with each other at the lower end, to squeeze out that last elusive drop of profit. Incidentally, for what it's worth, most video recorded 'evidence' is deemed unsuitable, not because the technology was inappropriate, but simply because it wasn't selected / set-up / installed correctly. IMHO, the biggest problem has always been (and still is) that too often cameras are installed with the wrong lens, and mounted in the wrong location. rant over - be gentle with me D.J. http://www.doktorjon.co.uk
Rich Posted May 5, 2005 Posted May 5, 2005 Id just like to say, this is a CCTV forum, Closed Circuit Television, Which is all about wait for it............. Moving images. Moving images are referred to as video. The point of a CCTV camera is to catch a series of images of a certain area to be able to replay and watch a time line of information, depending on how fast that action takes place and how much of the information needs to be captured is decided greatly on the fps being recorded. The idea is to get as many CLEAR and useable images that can be used for the desired purpose from the camera. SO, If you have a camera taking 21MP images then you are a photographer. Sticking that camera on the wall doesn't make it a cctv camera. CCTV cameras whether digital or analogue outputs, still produce at the chip a series of still images. I have a feeling that in Banks those big cameras that face you fixed to the wall on the way out, usually fitted with 35mm lenses, or used to be, are they standard cameras ? Or digital hi res cams (probably nowadays)
Service Engineer Posted May 10, 2005 Posted May 10, 2005 Just realised this subject has been up at the top for quite a while now.I must be mindful of my manners, many folks here have to make a living at this cctv stuff. My inbox is also full to bursting !!!. It's been at the top for a while because of the subject and the replies have been good reading, even the ones from those that didn't get it at 1st, . And i'm sure this topic will crop up again in the near future.. ........................................................ Dave Partridge (Romec Service Engineer)
ian.cant Posted May 10, 2005 Posted May 10, 2005 I have a feeling that in Banks those big cameras that face you fixed to the wall on the way out, usually fitted with 35mm lenses If your on about the ones that im thinking of they would be Geutebruck's and they take still images actually, just very fast!
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.