On 2017-06-20 06:22, AMuzi wrote:
http://ktla.com/2017/06/19/video-cap...bicycle-store/


Why is it that most surveillance capture is of such poor quality as in
the videos shown here? Do we need to dunk the designers of those
"systems" into a moat? That has helped in medieval times when bakers
were selling substandard rolls.

It is ridiculous to ask anyone "Call if you recognize this guy" when all
you can see is a fuzzy blob. Even the rather web cams I use for online
conferencing are WAY better than that inadequate "surveillance system"
that this store has. None of mine has cost more than $20. That store
owner should have all that video stuff ripped it out and get something
decent. Now. They should have made that decision two weeks ago when the
previous theft happened and the perp is totally unrecognizable.

Most thieves have a long rap sheet but finding them in the police
database requires pristine video capture. In this day and age that is a
piece of cake. It even was in the mid 80's. I designed a CCD camera back
then which took crystal-clear computer-controlled shots so I really do
not understand why shop owners put up with such junk. This is where the
state-of-the-art stands, where you can zoom into every facial or
clothing detail:

https://www.security-camera-warehous...urity-cameras/

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/