C5 Fare Dodgers - question
 

Did others see this?

Not that you need to have done to answer my question

The program appeared to show the roving RPIs/Police Offices had real time
access to the CCTV inside a specific bus (that they weren't riding on).

Do they really have that capability?

Or was this just post editing of the program to pretend that they did?

tim

C5 Fare Dodgers - question
 

On 22/10/2019 12:29, tim... wrote:
Did others see this?

Not that you need to have done to answer my question

The program appeared to show the roving RPIs/Police Offices had real
time access to the CCTV inside a specific bus (that they weren't riding
on).

Do they really have that capability?

Or was this just post editing of the program to pretend that they did?


You've just answered your question.


--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

C5 Fare Dodgers - question
 

On 22/10/2019 12:38, Graeme Wall wrote:
On 22/10/2019 12:29, tim... wrote:
Did others see this?

Not that you need to have done to answer my question

The program appeared to show the roving RPIs/Police Offices had real
time access to the CCTV inside a specific bus (that they weren't
riding on).

Do they really have that capability?

Or was this just post editing of the program to pretend that they did?


You've just answered your question.

Real time access to onboard CCTV *is* possible, if the right equipment
is fitted. It's rare, though. The company I used to work in CCTV for had
it fitted to a limited number of buses, and the police had mobile
receiving equipment in a following car/van.


--
Ria in Aberdeen

[Send address is invalid, use sipsoup at gmail dot com to reply direct]

C5 Fare Dodgers - question
 

"Graeme Wall" wrote in message
...
On 22/10/2019 12:29, tim... wrote:
Did others see this?

Not that you need to have done to answer my question

The program appeared to show the roving RPIs/Police Offices had real time
access to the CCTV inside a specific bus (that they weren't riding on).

Do they really have that capability?

Or was this just post editing of the program to pretend that they did?


You've just answered your question.

No, I haven't

the dialogue definitely suggested that the RPI was seeing the same video we
did

And it's obviously, in this technological era, technically possible

so the only question is, do the RPIs actually have the equipment to allow
it?

And given that one of the reasons why the Airwave replacement has been
delayed is because they haven't (yet) implemented the replay of video, No
wouldn't be a surprise.

But OTOH, as TfL's equipment probably doesn't have to have the same levels
of security as Police Systems require, it could be possible with off the
shelf devices.

tim




--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

C5 Fare Dodgers - question
 

"MissRiaElaine" wrote in message
...
On 22/10/2019 12:38, Graeme Wall wrote:
On 22/10/2019 12:29, tim... wrote:
Did others see this?

Not that you need to have done to answer my question

The program appeared to show the roving RPIs/Police Offices had real
time access to the CCTV inside a specific bus (that they weren't riding
on).

Do they really have that capability?

Or was this just post editing of the program to pretend that they did?


You've just answered your question.

Real time access to onboard CCTV *is* possible, if the right equipment is
fitted.

Fitted where?

on the bus,

in the control room

in the RPI's equipment?

It's rare, though. The company I used to work in CCTV for had it fitted to
a limited number of buses, and the police had mobile receiving equipment
in a following car/van.

It seemed from the rest of the program that onboard CCTV is retrospectively
available via the control room servers.

So, is that, saved "live"? Which would be a bit of an overkill for hundreds
of busses and what, 7 or 8 cameras per bus. Or uploaded at the end of turn
(the bus, not the driver).

tim

C5 Fare Dodgers - question
 

On 22/10/2019 15:34, tim... wrote:


"MissRiaElaine" wrote in message
...
On 22/10/2019 12:38, Graeme Wall wrote:
On 22/10/2019 12:29, tim... wrote:
Did others see this?

Not that you need to have done to answer my question

The program appeared to show the roving RPIs/Police Offices had real
time access to the CCTV inside a specific bus (that they weren't
riding on).

Do they really have that capability?

Or was this just post editing of the program to pretend that they did?


You've just answered your question.

Real time access to onboard CCTV *is* possible, if the right equipment
is fitted.

Fitted where?

on the bus,

in the control room

in the RPI's equipment?

It's rare, though. The company I used to work in CCTV for had it
fitted to a limited number of buses, and the police had mobile
receiving equipment in a following car/van.

It seemed from the rest of the program that onboard CCTV is
retrospectively available via the control room servers.

So, is that, saved "live"?Â* Which would be a bit of an overkill for
hundreds of busses and what, 7 or 8 cameras per bus.Â* Or uploaded at the
end of turn (the bus, not the driver).

The bus has an onboard HDD recorder which has capacity to hold footage
for around a month or so. The way it usually works (or did with us) is
that under normal circumstances, these are recording all the time that
the bus is active, from the moment the engine is started to a preset
period (a couple of hours or so) after it is switched off.

When the bus returns to garage at the end of the day, any incidents that
have been requested will be downloaded to the server. The whole of the
contents of the buses' HDD's will not be downloaded, this would just be
a waste of time, as for 99% of the time nothing important is happening.
You only need to download what you need to investigate any particular
incident that has been reported. If the bus happens to be in the garage,
then it's usually quite easy (I say usually, as sod's law says the
equipment on the bus will have failed when you really need something and
the police are standing next to you waiting..!) to download what is
needed and put it on a DVD or whatever. If it's out on the road, you
generally have to wait until it's back, hence it isn't possible to get
instant access.

For the purpose of a specific police operation, then they would follow a
bus in another vehicle and link directly to it, in this situation they
would be able to view the cameras live without being on the bus.

It *is* possible to view live camera feed from a moving vehicle back in
the garage, but it needs something like 4G fitted, which quite honestly
the company I worked for didn't feel was financially viable. Personally
I disagreed, but then I wasn't in charge of the budget.


--
Ria in Aberdeen

[Send address is invalid, use sipsoup at gmail dot com to reply direct]

C5 Fare Dodgers - question
 

On 22/10/2019 15:22, tim... wrote:


"Graeme Wall" wrote in message
...
On 22/10/2019 12:29, tim... wrote:
Did others see this?

Not that you need to have done to answer my question

The program appeared to show the roving RPIs/Police Offices had real
time access to the CCTV inside a specific bus (that they weren't
riding on).

Do they really have that capability?

Or was this just post editing of the program to pretend that they did?


You've just answered your question.

No, I haven't

the dialogue definitely suggested that the RPI was seeing the same video
we did

And it's obviously, in this technological era, technically possible

so the only question is, do the RPIs actually have the equipment to
allow it?

And given that one of the reasons why the Airwave replacement has been
delayed is because they haven't (yet) implemented the replay of video,
No wouldn't be a surprise.

But OTOH, as TfL's equipment probably doesn't have to have the same
levels of security as Police Systems require, it could be possible with
off the shelf devices.


Possibly a demo for the programme to make people think it was in normal use.




--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

C5 Fare Dodgers - question
 

MissRiaElaine wrote:
On 22/10/2019 15:34, tim... wrote:


"MissRiaElaine" wrote in message
...
On 22/10/2019 12:38, Graeme Wall wrote:
On 22/10/2019 12:29, tim... wrote:
Did others see this?

Not that you need to have done to answer my question

The program appeared to show the roving RPIs/Police Offices had real
time access to the CCTV inside a specific bus (that they weren't
riding on).

Do they really have that capability?

Or was this just post editing of the program to pretend that they did?


You've just answered your question.

Real time access to onboard CCTV *is* possible, if the right equipment
is fitted.

Fitted where?

on the bus,

in the control room

in the RPI's equipment?

It's rare, though. The company I used to work in CCTV for had it
fitted to a limited number of buses, and the police had mobile
receiving equipment in a following car/van.

It seemed from the rest of the program that onboard CCTV is
retrospectively available via the control room servers.

So, is that, saved "live"?Â* Which would be a bit of an overkill for
hundreds of busses and what, 7 or 8 cameras per bus.Â* Or uploaded at the
end of turn (the bus, not the driver).

The bus has an onboard HDD recorder which has capacity to hold footage
for around a month or so. The way it usually works (or did with us) is
that under normal circumstances, these are recording all the time that
the bus is active, from the moment the engine is started to a preset
period (a couple of hours or so) after it is switched off.

When the bus returns to garage at the end of the day, any incidents that
have been requested will be downloaded to the server. The whole of the
contents of the buses' HDD's will not be downloaded, this would just be
a waste of time, as for 99% of the time nothing important is happening.
You only need to download what you need to investigate any particular
incident that has been reported. If the bus happens to be in the garage,
then it's usually quite easy (I say usually, as sod's law says the
equipment on the bus will have failed when you really need something and
the police are standing next to you waiting..!) to download what is
needed and put it on a DVD or whatever. If it's out on the road, you
generally have to wait until it's back, hence it isn't possible to get
instant access.

For the purpose of a specific police operation, then they would follow a
bus in another vehicle and link directly to it, in this situation they
would be able to view the cameras live without being on the bus.

It *is* possible to view live camera feed from a moving vehicle back in
the garage, but it needs something like 4G fitted, which quite honestly
the company I worked for didn't feel was financially viable. Personally
I disagreed, but then I wasn't in charge of the budget.


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.

C5 Fare Dodgers - question
 

"MissRiaElaine" wrote in message
...


The bus has an onboard HDD recorder which has capacity to hold footage for
around a month or so. The way it usually works (or did with us) is that
under normal circumstances, these are recording all the time that the bus
is active, from the moment the engine is started to a preset period (a
couple of hours or so) after it is switched off.

When the bus returns to garage at the end of the day, any incidents that
have been requested will be downloaded to the server. The whole of the
contents of the buses' HDD's will not be downloaded, this would just be a
waste of time, as for 99% of the time nothing important is happening. You
only need to download what you need to investigate any particular incident
that has been reported. If the bus happens to be in the garage, then it's
usually quite easy (I say usually, as sod's law says the equipment on the
bus will have failed when you really need something and the police are
standing next to you waiting..!) to download what is needed and put it on
a DVD or whatever. If it's out on the road, you generally have to wait
until it's back, hence it isn't possible to get instant access.


very useful, but

I don't know who saw the program - no one has commented,

though (with exception of the previously referred to police incident) most
of the incidents highlighted were office staff (or more likely now,
automated systems) determining that particular Oyster cards as suspected of
being used to travel long, or dumbelling. Historic CCTV data (some of which
was from bus journeys) was used to capture images of the suspected
miscreant. Thus the actual CCTV footage viewed could be weeks old.

RPIs were then show on the lookout for that person the next time they went
through a barrier at the expected time (as you might imagine, not with 100%
success)

For the purpose of a specific police operation, then they would follow a
bus in another vehicle and link directly to it, in this situation they
would be able to view the cameras live without being on the bus.

The TV incident was "immediate"

tim

C5 Fare Dodgers - question
 

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

C5 Fare Dodgers - question
 

On 22/10/2019 17:08, Recliner wrote:

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.

I doubt it, they were still installing them when I left in 2015. They
were still running Office 2003 on the network as well, they never were
at the forefront of Information Technology..! They didn't fully get rid
of VHS tapes until around the time I left.



--
Ria in Aberdeen

[Send address is invalid, use sipsoup at gmail dot com to reply direct]

C5 Fare Dodgers - question
 

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

C5 Fare Dodgers - question
 

On Tue, 22 Oct 2019 21:21:38 -0000 (UTC)
Billy No Mates Always On His Own Billy No Mates Always On His Own.usenet@gmail.
com wrote:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 16:08:54 on Tue, 22 Oct
2019, Billy No Mates Always On His Own Billy No Mates Always On His Own.usen
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/Billy No Mates Always On His Own/albums/7215771
1379885958

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.

C5 Fare Dodgers - question
 

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.
--
Roland Perry

C5 Fare Dodgers - question
 

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

C5 Fare Dodgers - question
 

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.

C5 Fare Dodgers - question
 

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

C5 Fare Dodgers - question
 

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.

C5 Fare Dodgers - question
 

In message , at 20:37:27 on Wed, 23 Oct
2019, Recliner remarked:
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.

Like my dashcam (I presume the camera is essentially the same as that in
a phone).

The hardware is probably commodity by now.

My whole dashcam only cost about £30.

That doesn't leave much budget for the lens.

The lens is quite large (1.5cm), and wide angle (170 degrees). And yes,
it's probably one of the more expensive components.

But I run my dashcam at the lower setting of 720p, so that the SD card
fills up slower, which results in video a bit like this *after* it's
been cropped and re-compressed by video editing software to 30MB/min
@720p, and reprocessed by YouTube to 144-720p depending on the view you
select.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F4aHaSyBHvE

(Rail-related content)
--
Roland Perry

C5 Fare Dodgers - question
 

On 24/10/2019 07:27, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 20:37:27 on Wed, 23 Oct
2019, Recliner remarked:
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.

Like my dashcam (I presume the camera is essentially the same as that in
a phone).

The hardware is probably commodity by now.

My whole dashcam only cost about £30.

That doesn't leave much budget for the lens.

The lens is quite large (1.5cm), and wide angle (170 degrees). And yes,
it's probably one of the more expensive components.

But I run my dashcam at the lower setting of 720p, so that the SD card
fills up slower, which results in video a bit like this *after* it's
been cropped and re-compressed by video editing software to 30MB/min
@720p, and reprocessed by YouTube to 144-720p depending on the view you
select.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F4aHaSyBHvE

(Rail-related content)

Nice view of the sky, you need to pan the camera down a bit to see more
of the road.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

C5 Fare Dodgers - question
 

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 20:37:27 on Wed, 23 Oct 2019,
Recliner remarked:
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.

Like my dashcam (I presume the camera is essentially the same as that in a
phone).

The hardware is probably commodity by now.

My whole dashcam only cost about £30.

That doesn't leave much budget for the lens.

The lens is quite large (1.5cm), and wide angle (170 degrees). And yes,
it's probably one of the more expensive components.

I don't see why

non focusing, non zoom-able lenses cost pennies to make

tim

C5 Fare Dodgers - question
 

tim... wrote:


"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 20:37:27 on Wed, 23 Oct 2019,
Recliner remarked:
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.

Like my dashcam (I presume the camera is essentially the same as that in a
phone).

The hardware is probably commodity by now.

My whole dashcam only cost about £30.

That doesn't leave much budget for the lens.

The lens is quite large (1.5cm), and wide angle (170 degrees). And yes,
it's probably one of the more expensive components.

I don't see why

non focusing, non zoom-able lenses cost pennies to make

It's still a high precision optical component, probably with four or five
elements, at least one of which is probably glass. Would it also have
aperture blades?

C5 Fare Dodgers - question
 

On 24/10/2019 09:18, tim... wrote:


"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 20:37:27 on Wed, 23 Oct
2019, Recliner remarked:
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.

Like my dashcam (I presume the camera is essentially the same as that
in a phone).

The hardware is probably commodity by now.

My whole dashcam only cost about £30.

That doesn't leave much budget for the lens.

The lens is quite large (1.5cm), and wide angle (170 degrees). And
yes, it's probably one of the more expensive components.

I don't see why

non focusing, non zoom-able lenses cost pennies to make



The rest of the components probably cost fractions of a penny to make :-)


--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

C5 Fare Dodgers - question
 

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:


"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 20:37:27 on Wed, 23 Oct
2019,
Recliner remarked:
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.

Like my dashcam (I presume the camera is essentially the same as that in
a
phone).

The hardware is probably commodity by now.

My whole dashcam only cost about £30.

That doesn't leave much budget for the lens.

The lens is quite large (1.5cm), and wide angle (170 degrees). And yes,
it's probably one of the more expensive components.

I don't see why

non focusing, non zoom-able lenses cost pennies to make

It's still a high precision optical component, probably with four or five
elements, at least one of which is probably glass. Would it also have

not the one on mine

a single moulded item

aperture blades?

that is behind the glass not within the glass

C5 Fare Dodgers - question
 

"Graeme Wall" wrote in message
...
On 24/10/2019 09:18, tim... wrote:


"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 20:37:27 on Wed, 23 Oct
2019, Recliner remarked:
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.

Like my dashcam (I presume the camera is essentially the same as that in
a phone).

The hardware is probably commodity by now.

My whole dashcam only cost about £30.

That doesn't leave much budget for the lens.

The lens is quite large (1.5cm), and wide angle (170 degrees). And yes,
it's probably one of the more expensive components.

I don't see why

non focusing, non zoom-able lenses cost pennies to make



The rest of the components probably cost fractions of a penny to make :-)

like all ICs

but they tend to cost dollars to buy

Not worked on this product class, not sure if this will be single chip
solution or not?

I have an unused one sitting on my shelf that I can't "give away" [1],
perhaps I'll break it down

tim

[1] to someone deserved of being give it

C5 Fare Dodgers - question
 

tim... wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:


"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 20:37:27 on Wed, 23 Oct
2019,
Recliner remarked:
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.

Like my dashcam (I presume the camera is essentially the same as that in
a
phone).

The hardware is probably commodity by now.

My whole dashcam only cost about £30.

That doesn't leave much budget for the lens.

The lens is quite large (1.5cm), and wide angle (170 degrees). And yes,
it's probably one of the more expensive components.

I don't see why

non focusing, non zoom-able lenses cost pennies to make

It's still a high precision optical component, probably with four or five
elements, at least one of which is probably glass. Would it also have

not the one on mine

a single moulded item

I'd be very, very surprised. You'd get horrible image quality, unacceptable
even for a dashcam, with such a basic, single element lens. The elements
may be moulded plastic, but there are almost certainly several of them.


aperture blades?

that is behind the glass not within the glass

In all my many cameras and lenses, the aperture blades are between the lens
glass elements. But a small, cheap lens like this may have a fixed
aperture, with sensitivity controlled electronically. I also assume there's
no image stabilisation in such a cheap model.

C5 Fare Dodgers - question
 

In message , at 08:47:39 on Thu, 24 Oct
2019, Graeme Wall remarked:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F4aHaSyBHvE
(Rail-related content)

Nice view of the sky, you need to pan the camera down a bit to see more
of the road.

If I pan it down much, then you get a great view of the bonnet.

The vertical wide angle is a consequence of the horizontal wide angle.
An alternative would be to letter-box crop the video.

I agree I don't think I've quite got the compromise completely right.

This is an alternative (but has the time/date which is distracting for
this kind of posting): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjzEdKFbZ3Q
--
Roland Perry

C5 Fare Dodgers - question
 

In message , at 09:41:10 on Thu, 24 Oct
2019, Recliner remarked:

In all my many cameras and lenses, the aperture blades are between the lens
glass elements. But a small, cheap lens like this may have a fixed
aperture, with sensitivity controlled electronically.

It's much better after-dark than I was expecting. Quite an impressive
dynamic range.

I also assume there's no image stabilisation in such a cheap model.

That would require extra processing power.

My PC-based editing software will do image stabilisation
post-processing, but to some extent the "wobble", or perhaps lack of, as
the car goes over the level crossing [at 30.0mph] in that video is part
of the experience I'm trying to capture.
--
Roland Perry

C5 Fare Dodgers - question
 

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.

C5 Fare Dodgers - question
 

Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 09:41:10 on Thu, 24 Oct
2019, Recliner remarked:

In all my many cameras and lenses, the aperture blades are between the lens
glass elements. But a small, cheap lens like this may have a fixed
aperture, with sensitivity controlled electronically.

It's much better after-dark than I was expecting. Quite an impressive
dynamic range.

I also assume there's no image stabilisation in such a cheap model.

That would require extra processing power.

My PC-based editing software will do image stabilisation
post-processing, but to some extent the "wobble", or perhaps lack of, as
the car goes over the level crossing [at 30.0mph] in that video is part
of the experience I'm trying to capture.

I think small, cheap cameras have no moving parts, so no optical IS, no
mechanical shutter, no aperture blades, no lens cover, fixed focus and no
optical zoom. More expensive dash cams might include some of these 'luxury
features'.

C5 Fare Dodgers - question
 

On 24/10/2019 11:56, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 08:47:39 on Thu, 24 Oct
2019, Graeme Wall remarked:

Â*https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F4aHaSyBHvE
Â*(Rail-related content)

Nice view of the sky, you need to pan the camera down a bit to see
more of the road.

If I pan it down much, then you get a great view of the bonnet.

Always a problem with those things.


The vertical wide angle is a consequence of the horizontal wide angle.
An alternative would be to letter-box crop the video.

I agree I don't think I've quite got the compromise completely right.

Does it actually have much in the way of adjustment or is it a ratchet
type arrangement where you pick the least worst spot?

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

C5 Fare Dodgers - question
 

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

C5 Fare Dodgers - question
 

In message , at 14:08:18 on Thu, 24 Oct
2019, Graeme Wall remarked:
*https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F4aHaSyBHvE
*(Rail-related content)

Nice view of the sky, you need to pan the camera down a bit to see
more of the road.
If I pan it down much, then you get a great view of the bonnet.

Always a problem with those things.

The vertical wide angle is a consequence of the horizontal wide
angle. An alternative would be to letter-box crop the video.
I agree I don't think I've quite got the compromise completely
right.

Does it actually have much in the way of adjustment or is it a ratchet
type arrangement where you pick the least worst spot?

There are ratchet points, but somewhat a hostage to the fortune of the
rake of the windscreen.

--
Roland Perry

C5 Fare Dodgers - question
 

In message , at 08:47:39 on Thu, 24 Oct
2019, Graeme Wall remarked:

Nice view of the sky, you need to pan the camera down a bit to see more
of the road.

How about this (without stabilisation):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExWe0kjE6Ns

Doesn't really convey the bumps adequately. Suffice it to say they are
30mph max in a car, and used to be 60mph in a 4x4, but are now more like
50mph. Picked today because of the 4x4 coming in the opposite direction.
--
Roland Perry

C5 Fare Dodgers - question
 

On Thu, 24 Oct 2019 14:09:26 +0100, Roland Perry
wrote:

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.

Yes, but not if they're shown on 55" TVs. People now expect HD
quality.

C5 Fare Dodgers - question
 

In message , at 16:08:47 on
Thu, 24 Oct 2019, Recliner remarked:

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.

Yes, but not if they're shown on 55" TVs. People now expect HD
quality.

I didn't expect the Spanish Inquisition.
--
Roland Perry

C5 Fare Dodgers - question
 

On 24/10/2019 16:03, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 08:47:39 on Thu, 24 Oct
2019, Graeme Wall remarked:

Nice view of the sky, you need to pan the camera down a bit to see
more of the road.

How about this (without stabilisation):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExWe0kjE6Ns

Doesn't really convey the bumps adequately. Suffice it to say they are
30mph max in a car, and used to be 60mph in a 4x4, but are now more like
50mph. Picked today because of the 4x4 coming in the opposite direction.

Looks better, a more natural drivers eye view!

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

C5 Fare Dodgers - question
 

Roland Perry wrote:

I didn't expect the Spanish Inquisition.

Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition! (Sorry - I had to.)

C5 Fare Dodgers - question
 

In message , at 16:53:33 on Thu, 24 Oct
2019, Graeme Wall remarked:
Nice view of the sky, you need to pan the camera down a bit to see
more of the road.
How about this (without stabilisation):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExWe0kjE6Ns
Doesn't really convey the bumps adequately. Suffice it to say they
are 30mph max in a car, and used to be 60mph in a 4x4, but are now
more like 50mph. Picked today because of the 4x4 coming in the
opposite direction.

Looks better, a more natural drivers eye view!

A lot of that comes from cropping the excessively wide-angle original
video. On the other hand, if the video is to show what happened in an
accident, you do need as wide an angle as possible.
--
Roland Perry

C5 Fare Dodgers - question
 

On 24/10/2019 20:53, Arthur Conan Doyle wrote:
Roland Perry wrote:

I didn't expect the Spanish Inquisition.

Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition! (Sorry - I had to.)


Cardinal Biggles I assume?

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.