Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
![]() |
|
London Transport (uk.transport.london) Discussion of all forms of transport in London. |
Reply |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In message , at 16:08:54 on Tue, 22 Oct
2019, Recliner remarked: [CCTV] Presumably they'll have moved on from HDDs to solid state storage by now? They're only storing relatively low res compressed JPEGs, so the files will be small. My dashcam stores ridiculously uncompressed video. 250MB every 5 minutes. Downloaded TV shows are typically 200MB for their 42 minutes. -- Roland Perry |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 16:08:54 on Tue, 22 Oct 2019, Recliner remarked: [CCTV] Presumably they'll have moved on from HDDs to solid state storage by now? They're only storing relatively low res compressed JPEGs, so the files will be small. My dashcam stores ridiculously uncompressed video. 250MB every 5 minutes. Downloaded TV shows are typically 200MB for their 42 minutes. Which is trivial. My A7Riii‡ camera's RAW images are 41.3 MB, and it can shoot 10Â*of those per second (ie, more than 200MB in 0.5 sec). The memory card in the first slot holds 5840 images, and potentially the same again in the second slot. Those low res bus camera compressed JPEGs are probably well under 0.5MB each. If it stores one image per sec from, say, eight cameras, that's maybe 200MB/min at most, probably much less. ‡ Here's some pics I took last week in Ely with that camera: https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/albums/72157711379885958 |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wed, 23 Oct 2019 09:34:49 +0100
Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 07:41:34 on Wed, 23 Oct 2019, remarked: I wonder if dashcams storing low/uncompressed video is so it can accurately capture very fast movement - eg just before an accident - which most video compression systems are not particularly good at. I think it's because they don't want to have the silicon|dollars|power budget of compressing the video. They externalise it to users having to buy stupidly big SD cards. My previous dashcam gobbled through 1.2GB for each ten minute file. There must be more to it than that. Even cheap smartphones can do realtime video compression. The hardware is probably commodity by now. |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In message , at 19:05:11 on Wed, 23 Oct
2019, remarked: On Wed, 23 Oct 2019 09:34:49 +0100 Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 07:41:34 on Wed, 23 Oct 2019, remarked: I wonder if dashcams storing low/uncompressed video is so it can accurately capture very fast movement - eg just before an accident - which most video compression systems are not particularly good at. I think it's because they don't want to have the silicon|dollars|power budget of compressing the video. They externalise it to users having to buy stupidly big SD cards. My previous dashcam gobbled through 1.2GB for each ten minute file. There must be more to it than that. Even cheap smartphones can do realtime video compression. They produce files in MP4 format, but not very much compressed. My phone produces typically 150MB per minute (1920 x 1080 pixels). The hardware is probably commodity by now. My whole dashcam only cost about £30. -- Roland Perry |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 19:05:11 on Wed, 23 Oct 2019, remarked: On Wed, 23 Oct 2019 09:34:49 +0100 Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 07:41:34 on Wed, 23 Oct 2019, remarked: I wonder if dashcams storing low/uncompressed video is so it can accurately capture very fast movement - eg just before an accident - which most video compression systems are not particularly good at. I think it's because they don't want to have the silicon|dollars|power budget of compressing the video. They externalise it to users having to buy stupidly big SD cards. My previous dashcam gobbled through 1.2GB for each ten minute file. There must be more to it than that. Even cheap smartphones can do realtime video compression. They produce files in MP4 format, but not very much compressed. My phone produces typically 150MB per minute (1920 x 1080 pixels). So, Full HD video. The hardware is probably commodity by now. My whole dashcam only cost about £30. That doesn't leave much budget for the lens. |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Tue, 22 Oct 2019 21:21:38 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
wrote: Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 16:08:54 on Tue, 22 Oct 2019, Recliner remarked: [CCTV] Presumably they'll have moved on from HDDs to solid state storage by now? They're only storing relatively low res compressed JPEGs, so the files will be small. My dashcam stores ridiculously uncompressed video. 250MB every 5 minutes. Downloaded TV shows are typically 200MB for their 42 minutes. Which is trivial. My A7Riii‡ camera's RAW images are 41.3 MB, and it can shoot 10*of those per second (ie, more than 200MB in 0.5 sec). The memory card in the first slot holds 5840 images, and potentially the same again in the second slot. Those low res bus camera compressed JPEGs are probably well under 0.5MB each. If it stores one image per sec from, say, eight cameras, that's maybe 200MB/min at most, probably much less. ‡ Here's some pics I took last week in Ely with that camera: https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/albums/72157711379885958 Excellent pictures from a remarkable building - thanks. But just three mere glimpses of the very photogenic organ. Pity! I have played several cathedral organs, but not this one. Guy Gorton |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 07:02:49PM +0100, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 16:08:54 on Tue, 22 Oct 2019, Recliner remarked: Presumably they'll have moved on from HDDs to solid state storage by now? They're only storing relatively low res compressed JPEGs, so the files will be small. My dashcam stores ridiculously uncompressed video. 250MB every 5 minutes. Downloaded TV shows are typically 200MB for their 42 minutes. I think that shows it's quite some time since you were on the naughtynet! Looking at dodgy copies of rugby world cup quarter finals highlights as an example, in the list I'm looking at right now no-one is offering files that highly-compressed. Of those that are on offer, the least popular is the most compressed (348MB for 32 minutes) and the most popular is the least compressed (1.56GB for 32 minutes). -- David Cantrell | Official London Perl Mongers Bad Influence Longum iter est per praecepta, breve et efficax per exempla. |
#10
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In message , at 12:23:32
on Thu, 24 Oct 2019, David Cantrell remarked: On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 07:02:49PM +0100, Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 16:08:54 on Tue, 22 Oct 2019, Recliner remarked: Presumably they'll have moved on from HDDs to solid state storage by now? They're only storing relatively low res compressed JPEGs, so the files will be small. My dashcam stores ridiculously uncompressed video. 250MB every 5 minutes. Downloaded TV shows are typically 200MB for their 42 minutes. I think that shows it's quite some time since you were on the naughtynet! Looking at dodgy copies of rugby world cup quarter finals highlights as an example, in the list I'm looking at right now no-one is offering files that highly-compressed. Of those that are on offer, the least popular is the most compressed (348MB for 32 minutes) and the most popular is the least compressed (1.56GB for 32 minutes). For the majority of TV soap operas, what we once might have described as "VHS quality" is entirely adequate for viewers to follow the [rather weak in many cases] plotline|story-arc. -- Roland Perry |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
fare dodgers | London Transport | |||
fare dodgers | London Transport | |||
fare dodgers | London Transport | |||
fare dodgers | London Transport | |||
fare dodgers | London Transport |