Jasper

Practice, Practice and more Practice. It is a skill that is learned like any other.

You mean digital zoom? The Covi camera is a HD camera and can show 3 highlighted areas of the scene at the lower part of the screen. It uses digital zoom also, but not that crazy number on the COP camera. I don't know anyting about this camera that you just showed, but when it shows 216x zoom I don't think it is so hot. Plus I heard with a COP camera you wish there was a COP there.

Is that the sticker you put on the equipment you sell Looks pretty good actually.

Is there an IR filter on that camera lens? What model lens did you use?

Yeah, that place was long over due for one of those. That place is so busy they don't have time to scan ID's. That place needs the X-Ray scanner like they used on Arnold in "Totall Recall".

Have you checked out the new Covi camera? EVQ-1000, very nice camera. http://www.covitechnologies.com/

Yep. Your probably right. Forgot about the ID scanner. How is the scanning being done? The system that allows you to scan their ID and take a video still image seems to be a good way. As long as every person that comes in gets their ID scanned then no problem, otherwise no positive ID.

Yeah I have to agree the old Logo looks better. The camera was watching the 2 "C's", which are protected. Whereas on the new logo the camera is pointing towards the "V", which appears to have been stolen. What camera where you using there? Sorry. I know it is a lot of work.

Shoot I thought you were going to tell us his car was stolen while he was doing the radio show.

NEVER BE FOOLED: If you see just one single frame instead of the whole video to show you the quality of any deinterlacing method, be aware. You won't know how good or bad it really is. NEVER. Because you don't know how fluid the video plays and how many fine structures are lost and whether the deinterlacing method still fails sometimes or leaves interlaced lines. Instead, compare the deinterlacing methods by watching one minute or so of both videos with still and fast moving scenes. How fluid is it? How blurred is it? How many interlacing artifacts are left? Source: http://www.100fps.com/

Yes. That is why I said this is not such a simple question to answer. Much depends on all of the variables involved with the encoding and decoding of the video and the playback device that is used to view the video. You really want to go crazy read that sight you just sent me too. So interlacing is in fact a clever way to compress a movie when one cannot use digital compression methods. Interlacing reduces the bandwidth (= storage space nowadays) by half, without losing vertical resolution in quiet areas (in motion areas you don't notice very much anyway, because it's moving 50 times per second). So interlacing is a way to display the nonmoving parts with full resolution and the moving parts with half resolution, but fluidly. It's a very clever way to cut bandwidth without sacrificing much quality. BUT: You have to deinterlace the right way. What is confusing is that my testing is showing that on this GeoVision setup, files created using the deinterlaced method are producing much smaller files than the interlaced method. Usually bigger files means better quality due to less compression being used. But the above statement does not match my testing results, which are the interlaced files are bigger, not smaller than de-interlaced files. This must be due to digital compression method being used in this case.

one of the other cameras went from 83MB deinterlace to 131MB when switched to interlace. Big difference in this situation. If your file sizes are not substancially increasing then interlace would seem to be the right choice for you. Your test results must be varying greatly because your testing with a 380tvl camera and I am testing with a 480tvl camera? Plus your recording at 720x480, whereas I am recording at 640x480.

You got the opposiite results though, weird. Your interlaced file was smaller than the deinterlaced video file? Not that much difference either in your test? What is going on here? Is this the 380tvl camera again?

After re-reading this thread I realize you intend on using that camera to ID people. That camera is not zoomed in enough on that door for good identification purposes. I like the way Rory setup a camera at a club that gets a head and upper body shot of the person before they come in the door. Then in conjunction with other cameras used for monitoring you can ID the person easily. Just a thought.

Yes, that is at continous record mode at 7fps, using the FastMpeg4 (GEOX) codec.

OK, I just ran the test remotely. The file size went from 23MB for 5 minutes of video at 640x480 7fps, to 35MB per 5 minute file when switched to interlace. 480tvl camera. And that is using the Crappy FastMpeg4 codec (GEOX). The better quality compression methods are going to eat up much more hard drive space. If you have a lot of extra hard disk space I would record at whatever looked the best, but as we know, that is a lot of hard disk space.

I like you too, when your un-armed. Mr. Squid, glad to finally here somebody bought something from the many people who contribute to this forum. You know you can count on good support. And being five miles away from you, that is real convient.

If you record 5 minutes of video using the two different methods, which one takes up the most amount of disk space? If the deinterlace method takes up much less space, wouldn't want to use it? Maybe you can run that test Rory. I did it awhile back when I had a Geosystem in my possesion, but now that it is in location I can't run the test right now.

Adjusted to bring out distortion: Interlaced: Deinterlaced: Interlaced looks better in this snapshot with the detail brought out. But what are the file size differences? How many people could see that much of a difference before the images were enhanced?

Also compare the file sizes between the same amount of video in both modes. When I tried it, the interlaced took up quite a bit more space. Is this correct or is my memory failing me? If you play it back on a TV, then interlaced would be better since a TV is an interlaced device. Also still shots are not really a good way to compare. Video would be a better demo. I doubt if most people can tell the difference though. This question cannot be simply answered by a yes or no. It depends.

Sorry guy, but that is really something you should have been aware of. You can always bet that a demo is going to be using a fast upload connection because they know how to best represent their product. Upload speed is costly and not readily available to the average consumer, unless you want to pay big bucks like you said. Chalk it up to live and learn. You just have to do your best to explain it to your customer unless you sold them on the idea that it would look just like the demo they saw or you showed them. That is a tough one.

If I watch it, it is really to see Simon be brutally honest with the contestants and Paula tell everyone their great. Randy and Paula against Simon. It is also interesting to watch the process of people who as they become more popular they become more hollywood. Like they are now better than the average person they were at the beginning of the show. Some of the people that don't even have a voice are amazing to watch as they have unbeilvable attitudes. I never knew there were so many overconfident people out there out of touch with reality.

That wasn't a girl it was something they found in the woods. Just teasing.

Look forward to seeing the other two cameras in action too. Post a couple of pictures when you can.

Here is the link to your manual: ftp://ftp.panasonic.com/pub/Panasonic/CCTV/OperatingInstructions/WV-CL924A-OPERATING-INSTRUCTIONS.pdf This is the web site I have been using for hosting video files. It has a lot of annoying advertisements, but it is free so can't complain. http://www.filefactory.com/