CCTVCam
Known around here
- Sep 25, 2017
- 2,815
- 3,683
I concede that's pretty good. Obviously cameras have moved on and the UK still have a majority of older systems.
Terrible picture of thief SD59225U-HNI
- Thread starter cornholio
- Start date
I concede that's pretty good. Obviously cameras have moved on and the UK still have a majority of older systems.
Kawboy12R
Known around here
- Nov 18, 2014
- 1,763
- 609
That's the problem with most cameras in "auto" mode. They refuse to speed up the exposure time to enable crisp shots unless it is in bright sunlight. Only then do they work properly. Fast bird, vehicle, or even a person running up close on a cloudy day? Don't expect auto to get the job done. Manual exposure time set to, say, 1/1000s will get the detail you need. Even 1/500s is WAY better than most cams set to auto will do on a cloudy day when they have much more than enough light to operate at 1/1000s or faster.
And don't get me started about night exposure speed. I think they all default to 1/30s max if it's night regardless of available light. Check the blurriness of moving vehicles in the frame when dusk is coming but it's still bright out.
And don't get me started about night exposure speed. I think they all default to 1/30s max if it's night regardless of available light. Check the blurriness of moving vehicles in the frame when dusk is coming but it's still bright out.
mat200
IPCT Contributor
- Jan 17, 2017
- 15,053
- 25,384
NoloC
Getting comfortable
- Nov 24, 2014
- 682
- 458
But there is no light. The cam I posted the pic from would look like that given that lighting. Exactly what @Kawboy12R said about shutter speeds is correct.
Why shouldn't I just use a wireless camera instead of doing all that? I know this forum hates wireless cameras but with a wifi client device and repeaters, how this setup going to be better?
As an Amazon Associate IPCamTalk earns from qualifying purchases.
CCTVCam
Known around here
- Sep 25, 2017
- 2,815
- 3,683
I'm pretty sure that was my view before, but I got shot down for it in the other thread with reference to number plates and removing the motion blur.
Kawboy12R
Known around here
- Nov 18, 2014
- 1,763
- 609
It might depend on how you phrased it. I don't remember it specifically at the moment. Auto sucks for freezing fast motion in all but bright daylight. Considering how many people use auto and how poorly implemented day/night profiles are when trying to use fixed custom exposure rates, camera manufacturers should be ashamed of the poor fast motion captures of their products when they're capable of so much better with just a little tweaking of their firmware.
Kawboy12R
Known around here
- Nov 18, 2014
- 1,763
- 609
First point yes, second one? Meh, I think something else is probably in operation there for the most part, but some motion blur DOES tend to take the harshness out of video. That's why cinematographers prefer shooting slow panning motion shots of 30fps at 1/30th or 1/60th exposure. A bit of motion blur smooths out the pixel jumping when the exposure is the same as or double the framerate. You'll find drone operators put filters on their cameras to achieve the same effect, basically putting sunshades on the camera to slow down the exposure. It's lousy for still shots though- too easy to have blurring on a freeze frame. For CCTV, you WANT to have harsh clear frames for printing out paused screenshots. You aren't shooting cinematic video.