Terrible picture of thief SD59225U-HNI

C

cornholio

Young grasshopper
Jan 24, 2017
71
16
Bay Area, California
My Dahua caught a thief but the picture quality is terrible :( the motion tracking didn't do it's thing either.
The motion tracking is moody at best, I find that I have to move the camera around a bit every now and then to make sure the motion tracking is doing it's thing.

What am I doing wrong?
 
  • Like
Reactions: mat200
Can't comment on the tracking, but the video, looks perfectly good video to me. It looks sharp and reasonably well exposed.

I'd suggest your "quality" issues are as follows:

1. The camera is mounted too high - ideally it should be at face height so it gets a perfect picture of the suspects face and is impossible to avoid by common tactics such as peaked hats, hoods or looking down. In fact at face height, anything this side of a suspect wearing a balaclava is probably going to get you a facial picture.

2. If you're also referencing the quality of stills from video, then usually the quality is poor for a number of reasons - I'm not getting to enter another discussion that might inflame admin. Lets just say video cameras aren't known for producing quality stills. I'd suggest, if you want high quality stills, then you could do with a 2nd dedicated stills camera with some means of triggering it via a detection signal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Q™
If you want less motion blur, you need to take the camera out of auto mode and force an exposure limit.

But yes, the camera's angle is not very good. She didn't even leave the path and her face was only in view from a steep angle for one second at normal walking speed.
 
Placement as mentioned is your biggest problem. Granted, the PTZ didnt work as expected, but even if it had I dont think you'd have got a great ID at that angle.

I would replace that PTZ with TWO fixed cameras, one for overview and one for facial ID, like the 5231 Starlights, and add a motion sensing light to provide more white light.
 
CCTVCam said:
2. If you're also referencing the quality of stills from video, then usually the quality is poor for a number of reasons - I'm not getting to enter another discussion that might inflame admin. Lets just say video cameras aren't known for producing quality stills. I'd suggest, if you want high quality stills, then you could do with a 2nd dedicated stills camera with some means of triggering it via a detection signal.
Click to expand...
again nonsense....buy a camera before commenting further...you just dont know what you are talking about...shame on you. With a user name like yours you would think you actually owned a camera. This is all about improper mounting, poor exposure settings and a video that has been uploaded to youtube. "separate camera for stills? wtf is wrong with you, really?
 
  • Like
Reactions: bctrainers
Oh, I've been on the default settings all this while! I'm gonna try the scheduled day/night modes and play with exposure settings. Initial googling suggests I should increase shutter speed to get better stills but ensure that there is enough light. I'm assuming I can make it so that IR can compensate for the lower light per snap due to high shutter speed.

However, I'd appreciate tips/links on what I can do to get a better image. Thanks in advance!
 
Start with 1/60 manual exposure in your night profile and play with the gain setting if that seems too dark (which it probably won't). Walk in front of the camera personally and come back and check the recording to see how it worked out. If too blurry, increase exposure speed.

You lose color recording if you enable IR, so if that matters to you then you should get a separate starlight cam for color/overview. You seem to have a lot of ambient light there so I'd say it is worth having at least one cam in color so you can get vehicle/clothing/hair colors.
 
  • Like
Reactions: fenderman and bigredfish
You can also zoom out significantly you dont need that tight of a shot....you will catch them as the approach the door...
 
fenderman said:
again nonsense....buy a camera before commenting further...you just dont know what you are talking about...shame on you. With a user name like yours you would think you actually owned a camera. This is all about improper mounting, poor exposure settings and a video that has been uploaded to youtube. "separate camera for stills? wtf is wrong with you, really?
Click to expand...

All I can say is our experiences are different Fenderman, and I stand corrected. The UK is the most watched nation in the world. There's CCTV on every city street, in every shop, office and business, on every bus and every train, in pubs, clubs, sports centres, car parks and even in taxis. There's almost no-where in the UK apart from a quiet residential street where you're not being watched by commercial grade CCTV. A typical UK citizen will see stills from CCTV on TV in crimes appeals at least once a day, sometimes multiple times. I work in retail currently and the small shop I work in - maybe 75ft square has around 14 cameras with 6 alone watching the tills.

In my experience, this is pretty typical of a still from an exceptional quality CTTV system:

Charlie-Palmer2.jpg


Quite soft and slightly blurry, with poor face definition , albeit just recognisable.

This is one of the best I've seen. Most I've seen don't even approach that quality, even Local Authority operated systems.

Always willing to learn though and if your systems can exceed that, then looking forward to hearing / seeing the details.
 
Last edited:
fenderman said:
With a user name like yours you would think you actually owned a camera.
Click to expand...

I actually have a lot of experience with cameras generally including video, and a little experience of CCTV.

The reason I don't currently own a CCTV system is I can't afford one, not least as well because I have a very difficult site to secure - it would probably take 5-6 cameras including a couple of those being PTZ turrets to secure my home. That equals a very expensive installation for someone who can't even currently afford a single camera system.
 
CCTVCam said:
All I can say is our experiences are different Fenderman, and I stand corrected. The UK is the most watched nation in the world. There's CCTV on every city street, in every shop, office and business, on every bus and every train, in pubs, clubs, sports centres, car parks and even in taxis. There's almost no-where in the UK apart from a quiet residential street where you're not being watched by commercial grade CCTV. A typical UK citizen will see stills from CCTV on TV in crimes appeals at least once a day, sometimes multiple times. I work in retail currently and the small shop I work in - maybe 75ft square has around 14 cameras with 6 alone watching the tills.

In my experience, this is pretty typical of a still from an exceptional quality CTTV system:

Charlie-Palmer2.jpg


Quite soft and slightly blurry, with poor face definition , albeit just recognisable.

This is one of the best I've seen. Most I've seen don't even approach that quality, even Local Authority operated systems.

Always willing to learn though and if your systems can exceed that, then looking forward to hearing / seeing the details.
Click to expand...
wow...you are really dense..you do understand that those images are taken by a VIDEO camera..right? it is not a special dedicated still camera. An old vga camera at that....the fact the you have not seen better stills proves my point...you are clueless, stop misleading the members here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CCTVCam and fenderman
fenderman said:
You can also zoom out significantly you dont need that tight of a shot....you will catch them as the approach the door...
Click to expand...
Thanks @fenderman, that is the most zoomed out I can be. I actually need to replace that camera (coz my neighbors don't like the motion tracking when I point the camera at the street in front of my home - the reason I bought a large PTZ in the first place). I'm planning to replace it with the ipc-hdw5231r-z. But you're right, I still won't get a good angle to ID a face. I'm stuck with a very restrictive HOA and inconvenient wiring and so changing the location of the camera is not really an option for me. Another PoE camera is definitely out of question for me because of my limitations. I could maybe put a wireless camera at the level of the path looking up and hire the wiring under the black wood chips. Any idea if that would work better to ID a face?
 
I suspect a camera at ground level is going to be a bug magnet but it should be better for face ID than what you have now.

Powerline networking is an alternative to wireless. Similarly, you can always buy a wired camera and attach it to a wifi client device in a weatherproof box. http://a.co/dd0jQpK http://a.co/fUUxhqt
 
As an Amazon Associate IPCamTalk earns from qualifying purchases.
cornholio said:
Thanks @fenderman, that is the most zoomed out I can be. I actually need to replace that camera (coz my neighbors don't like the motion tracking when I point the camera at the street in front of my home - the reason I bought a large PTZ in the first place). I'm planning to replace it with the ipc-hdw5231r-z. But you're right, I still won't get a good angle to ID a face. I'm stuck with a very restrictive HOA and inconvenient wiring and so changing the location of the camera is not really an option for me. Another PoE camera is definitely out of question for me because of my limitations. I could maybe put a wireless camera at the level of the path looking up and hire the wiring under the black wood chips. Any idea if that would work better to ID a face?
Click to expand...

Yeah HOA for another win....

Wondering if those cameras in outside light fixtures are any good... or if there is a way to hack a light fixture and include a Dahua ...
 
  • Like
Reactions: cornholio
Wow!
 
So what shutter speed is that?
 
Well I dunno cause it is auto. But must be pretty fast! It would be cool if the cams had a little indicator for aperture and speed when in auto. This camera is not very good at night and I have begun replacing them with the 5231s. Although even with those I am finding additional light is really the deal. As you and others have pointed out.

My point in posting was to refute the misguided individuals assertations here about stills and frame rates. (CCTVcam)
Not to "pile on" but to prevent users from seeing his erroneous information and believing it. A long tradition here thanks to the Mods.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SLC, looney2ns and fenderman
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom