Re: Security camera image storage question.

On Thu, 1 Sep 2005 16:29:23 +0200, "Maarten Wiltink"
<maarten@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> waffled on about something:

>"Dodgy" <Dodgy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>news:2fudh1tue1jhpg7ch9gbn66jem5dnf3fvc@xxxxxxxxxx
>
>> I've got a blank and white low light security camera hooked up to a
>> WinTV card and I'm happily capping images every second onto the hard
>> drive.
>[...]
>> Anyway, that's all well and good except if something happens I have to
>> spend ages trawling through images to find it.
>
>Just play them at 30 or 50 fps. When you hit the button, replay the
>last second at 5 fps and pause.
>
>I think that a one-second interval is shorter than strictly necessary.
>There's nothing actually wrong with capturing that many images, but
>perhaps you could skip two or three for every frame you display, or
>blend a few consecutive images together. That's assuming this is a
>stationary camera.
>
>Groetjes,
>Maarten Wiltink

Hi Maarten,

Not a bad idea, but I'd really like to automatically remove as much
redundant footage as possible at source. At the moment I'm capping to
a local harddrive, but shortly I'll be capping across our VPN to the
co-location site. (Not much point having a security camera if the
buggers can break in and steal the machine with all the images on
it!).
At that point although one 40k jpeg a second isn't going to bother the
VPN bandwidth, the company accountant will come and moan at me as we
have an allocated traffic volume per month with the co-location host
company, and that level of constant data is pretty much going to use
it all up. Then we'll start incurring burst traffic charges.

Yes it is a stationary camera, it looks at a door. I tried dropping
the capture rate, but found 1 a second is the best minimum that
guarantees a good mug shot of anyone coming through the door.

Dodgy.

Dodgy.
--
MUSHROOMS ARE THE OPIATE OF THE MOOSES
.