Is Cheap Video Surveillance Possible? 700
timholman writes "After a series of burglaries and auto break-ins in my neighborhood, I'm thinking about adding some video security cameras to my home. To me, the object isn't just deterrence — if someone tries to break into my house or my car (parked on the street in front of my house), I'd like to provide a high-quality image of the perpetrator to the police. Inexpensive video surveillance systems, with their atrocious image quality, are nearly useless. The problem is being able to get good image quality at an affordable price. After some research, I've decided that using network cameras to FTP images to a central server over a HomePlug network is the best solution. However, good megapixel network cameras (e.g. Stardot or Axis cameras) can easily cost more than $1,000 each. Has any of you dealt with a similar situation? Is there any way to get reasonable quality (preferably open source) daytime and nighttime video surveillance equipment for home use without paying an arm and a leg? Is it better to go with a couple of expensive cameras, or a multitude of inexpensive cameras? Is paying two to three thousand dollars simply unavoidable if I want to monitor my front and back yards?"
IQeye (Score:5, Informative)
WiLife (Score:5, Informative)
Quick answer - No (Score:2, Informative)
If you want the quality then pay the money for good cameras. Megapixel is the way to go, especially if you want to cover a whole front or back yard.
Also don't forget good lenses for them as well. Lenses that did a good job for standard definition often don't cut it with megapixel cameras.
Check out http://www.arecontvision.com/ and http://www.iqeye.com/
I don't work for either of these companies although I have installed the Arecont cameras as part of my job.
The results from the 2M Arecont camera was described by the police officer as the best CCTV he had ever seen. Shame they never actually found the guy....
GPL Monitoring Software (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Here is a start... (Score:4, Informative)
Step 1) Get used camera 2) download this software (Score:5, Informative)
Steps: 1)Go through the list of cameras on the above site, and select one that has the specs you want (good resolution, zoom, etc.)
2)Check eBay or find a used one.
3)setup software and install camera where you want it.
4)Enjoy cheap but hi-res image security.
Many of the cameras on the list above go for less than $100 in good used condition, and offer many megapixels and good optical resolution. Many of them also have other features like low light mode, or other things that can be controlled by computer software. Good luck!
That is just what he's looking for. (Score:1, Informative)
Multiple cheap cameras are better than fewer fancy cameras. What you want is enough cameras to cover the area well enough to get that picture. Two cheap cameras will cover twice the area one expensive camera does all the time. Pan and tilt is useless unless you want to hire people to sit on it all day and even then you don't get as much coverage as three or four cameras would give you. You want to have one camera with a close up for each door to get face shots and a few wide angle cameras to record all the dirty deeds done. Five or six cameras should be more than enough for the average small business or home.
With Zone Minder you can scrape together a good system for a few hundred bucks. Good quality analog cameras are tiny and can be bought for about $40 each. Both BTTV and V4Linux are stable interfaces with lots of good hardware support. BTTV capture cards are cheap and accept analog inputs that give good enough resolution. All of this can be piped back to an old PC that has five or six PCI slots free. You can add more PCs as the size of your house or business increases. This is equivalent to the professional systems you see in grocery stores but less hackable because you can run it on a good OS like GNU/Linux.
Re:Seriously, get a dog (Score:4, Informative)
Not so easy and very bad. (Score:0, Informative)
The problem with domestic spying is that it will only be used against you. The FBI does not involve itself in cases involving a large amount of loss (either $50,000 or $500,000 I can't remember right now). The other problem is that they won't tell you they are taking the pictures in the first place until they get a search warrant and turn your life upside down. You don't want to be on a watch list and you should be outraged that your government is once again infiltrating and monitoring religious groups.
Sorry, wrong URL (Score:3, Informative)
http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CHDK_in_Brief [wikia.com]
steel door, bars, dog, cameras, safe, and gun (Score:2, Informative)
Re:IQeye (Score:3, Informative)
Anyone interested in security cameras and equipment ought to check out http://www.supercircuits.com/ [supercircuits.com]
Re:IQeye (Score:2, Informative)
I've actually been in a situation where some company tried to get out of paying me for some work I did. I taped a conversation in which my contact person at the the company admitted that their claimed reason for not paying me was not true and the fuck up was not my fault. But my solicitor told me that since I hadn't got her agreement for recording her, it was inadmissable evidence. So amateur surveillance might not help you much. It's also illegal, though I don't think the burglar would be able to sue you even in the hippy criminal's rights obsessed UK.
On the other hand I know someone who's house was burgled. The police fit a wireless camera system there - she could disable it when she was at home. I think they actually caught the burglars using one of the other cameras they installed in the neighbourhood. So the government can use video evidence. Then again, this was a very, very good camera from what I've heard. So as well as getting a lawyer approved weasel words for your front door, get a lawyer approved camera too. Webcams I think would be useless.
I have a working solution... (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Here is a start... (Score:3, Informative)
Built in IR is not good for color. A motion yard light is the norm and is often not thought of in conjuction with a security camera. A well lit area and cameras is an area often avoided, but a motion light is often ignored in backyards. Get good color photos. Color logos on clothing and other identification is good to get. Keep the IR in addition as many motion sensors have reachable bulbs that are often removed. By then you have photos of the perp, but you still need evidence of the crime after the light is out.
Super Circuits (Score:3, Informative)
This is the key to effective CCTV: (Score:1, Informative)
I don't know what the laws are like where you are, but in the UK, if you have CCTV you are legally obliged to have warning signs, and have to comply with the data protection act.
Re:Deadly force (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Uh, you realize your error, right? (Score:5, Informative)
And yes, the 1.5 million number is possibly an overestimation. It's rather impossible to say, unfortunately - a good deal of that aforementioned page 9 discusses the problems involved in getting that number, and why it's probably inaccurate. However, you can't honestly be claiming that it's an overestimation by two orders of magnitude, which is what your original estimate would require.
I guess "need" is for each of us to decide (Score:5, Informative)
Where We're Headed
Robert A. Waters
You're sound asleep when you hear a thump outside your bedroom door.
Half-awake, and nearly paralyzed with fear, you hear muffled whispers. At least two people have broken into your house and are moving your way.
With your heart pumping, you reach down beside your bed and pick up your shotgun. You rack a shell into the chamber, then inch toward the door and open it.
In the darkness, you make out two shadows. One holds a weapon--it looks like a crowbar.
When the intruder brandishes it as if to strike, you raise the shotgun and fire. The blast knocks both thugs to the floor. One writhes and screams while the second man crawls to the front door and lurches outside.
As you pick up the telephone to call police, you know you're in trouble. In your country, most guns were outlawed years before, and the few that are privately owned are so stringently regulated as to make them useless. Yours was never registered.
Police arrive and inform you that the second burglar has died. They arrest you for First Degree Murder and Illegal Possession of a Firearm.
When you talk to your attorney, he tells you not to worry: authorities will probably plea the case down to manslaughter. "What kind of sentence will I get?" you ask. "Only ten-to-twelve years," he replies, as if that's nothing. "Behave yourself, and you'll be out in seven."
The next day, the shooting is the lead story in the local newspaper. Somehow, you're portrayed as an eccentric vigilante while the two men you shot are represented as choir boys. Their friends and relatives can't find an unkind word to say about them. Buried deep down in the article, authorities acknowledge that both "victims" have been arrested numerous times. But the next day's headline says it all: "Lovable Rogue Son Didn't Deserve to Die." The thieves have been transformed from career criminals into Robin Hood-type pranksters.
As the days wear on, the story takes wings. The national media picks it up, then the international media.
The surviving burglar has become a folk hero. Your attorney says the thief is preparing to sue you, and he'll probably win.
The media publishes reports that your home has been burglarized several times in the past and that you've been critical of local police for their lack of effort in apprehending the suspects. After the last break-in, you told your neighbor that you would be prepared next time. The District Attorney uses this to allege that you were lying in wait for the burglars.
A few months later, you go to trial. The charges haven't been reduced, as your lawyer had so confidently predicted. When you take the stand, your anger at the injustice of it all works against you. Prosecutors paint a picture of you as a mean, vengeful man.
It doesn't take long for the jury to convict you of all charges.
The judge sentences you to life in prison.
This case really happened.
On August 22, 1999, Tony Martin of Emneth, Norfolk, England, killed one burglar and wounded a second. In April, 2000, he was convicted and is now serving a life term.
How did it become a crime to defend one's own life in the once-great British Empire?
It started with the Pistols Act of 1903. This seemingly reasonable law forbade selling pistols to minors or felons and established that handgun sales were to be made only to those who had a license. The Firearms Act of 1920 expanded licensing to include not only handguns but all firearms except shotguns. Later laws passed in 1953 and 1967 outlawed the carrying of any weapon by private citizens and mandated the registration of all shotguns.
Momentum for total handgun confiscation began in earnest after the Hungerford mass shooting in 1987. Michael Ryan, a mentally disturbed man with a Kalashnikov rifle, walked down the streets shooting everyone he saw. When the smoke cleared, 17 people were dead.
The British public, already desensitize
Re:I guess "need" is for each of us to decide (Score:4, Informative)
I'm not saying I agree or disagree with your story, just making sure it is updated appropriately.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Martin_(farmer) [wikipedia.org]
Re:I guess "need" is for each of us to decide (Score:2, Informative)
Re:I guess "need" is for each of us to decide (Score:4, Informative)
So the story as presented is incredibly biased, obviously written to rally the NRA crowd in America. Maybe you made the post for the sake of completion but it should really be modded down for being only half truths and propoganda.
Re:Uh, you realize your error, right? (Score:3, Informative)
Also, if you're allowed to multiply the chance of a gun accident by the number of years someone lives, I am allowed to multiply the chance of rape, murder, assault, and so forth. Multiplying by age is a red herring that you're using simply to make the number larger. Stop doing that, it's immaterial to the comparisons.
We're not looking at the raw "bad things" that guns cause. We're looking at the bad things compared to the good things.
Usable images at night means money.... (Score:2, Informative)
I live in a resort area. Vacant homes are often robbed during winter. During the summers, people will monkey with boat docks as well. My property has two sets of cameras.
The expensive camera is hidden near the road and has been configured to capture the license plates of all cars coming and going. Being able to read the license plate, at night, of a car moving 30 to 50 miles per hour required a camera that cost $1200.
My dock also has cameras, but much lower end. (Three $200ish cameras) The dock lighting is rigged to motion sensors. At night when a boat gets close, the dock lights up and the cameras work fine. Turn off the lights and cameras are in the dark.
So far the cameras have not caught any thieves--just drunk buddies coming over in the middle of the night...
Lots of folks have talked about dogs and guns. Dogs are great as night watchmen/an early warning system--i.e. if I'm sleeping and hear my dogs go nuts, I know someone is about. If you aren't home--dogs don't do much good.
As for weapons--a law enforcement friend had a great philosophy. Buy a pump shotgun for home defense. The pump makes a very distinctive noise in a quite house at night. The noise of a shell being chambered should be enough to make most thieves run... I personally don't like using guns for defense--I'm scared I would hesitate to shoot and end up having the weapon used against me or escalating the situation.
My 2 Cents... (Score:2, Informative)
If your looking to protect your property while your home, get a gun. Before all the gun-toters start screaming YAY! and all the hippies start clubbing me to death, understand this. A gun is both a weapon and a tool, and one you must have the maturity and responsibility to handle. They say the sound of a shotgun racking is one of the most frightening sounds in the world to a robber. If its a handgun, get a TacLight put on it (like surefire), this will blind the crook, and allow you to positively ID that it's not your son sneaking out of the house or something. If it was me staring down the barrel and hardly able to see, it'd scare the shit out of me. I've had several friends, including a female that was home alone, use guns to simply scare away robbers. A cheap VCR might not be worth pulling a gun out for, but what else are they there for? Will they rape you, your wife, your daughter? Are they willing to kill to keep from leaving witnesses? There's all sorts of messed up humans out there today. Owning a gun and doesn't mean you have to pull the trigger, but be prepared to if you must. I realize this wasn't in the original topic (I'm getting to that) but feel it should be addressed after all the other comments. Personally I think everyone should own a gun, and I also believe EVERYONE (especially said owners) should learn how to properly use one and should learn the maturity involved in having one.
If your looking to protect your stuff while your not home... A dog is a good deterrent, sure, the guy on that show might not be afraid of one, but he's a professional crook, not a petty low life. Personally, I'm a dog lover, so I'll have one anyway. If you hate dogs though, the extra protection probably isn't worth your misery, don't bother...
Cameras probably aren't going to help unless you actually spend some money on them, which is the whole point of what your trying to do. If you setup some cheap cameras directly in front of the windows and doors, the crook might get close enough for you to catch a face, but in the dark, or if hes stealing your car 40 feet away from the camera, probably not. Personally, I'd use them more for insurance claims, so you can clearly prove what was stolen. If you catch the crook in the act, hey, bonus, but I wouldn't rely on them being a case breaker unless you spend some money on them.
I think the best thing to do is setup motion lights around your house, and perhaps get a good alarm system. I know if I was scouting a house and my movement made the place light up like noon on a cloudless summer day, I'd move on to another house in a hurry, and if I kept going and broke a window/busted a door and suddenly an alarm started blaring, I'd be out of there. I know they say audio alarms are worthless, but that's mainly on cars because people are so used to hearing them go off when someone bumps into a car too hard in a mall parking lot, but I think there's a big difference when it's going off in the middle of the night in a neighborhood.
Defiantly motion lights though, if you do go the route of cheap cameras, at least they'll light up the crooks face. If that leads to catching him, bonus.
You could always go the home alone route and setup a net to catch the crook and a swinging cinder block to knock him out until you get home to call the cops...
Re:I guess "need" is for each of us to decide (Score:5, Informative)
While the outcome does seem unjust, the case was not as lopsidedly unjust as this version of the story makes it appear.
Use hunting cam (Score:2, Informative)
Re:IQeye (Score:3, Informative)
I'm not quite sure what logic you're trying to follow here. Are you saying that people should [i]not[/i] be allowed to defend themselves? Because if so, I don't want to live in any country that you have any ability to set laws in.