cglaeser

My DSL modem dropped internet connection today so I called AT&T technical support. One of the tasks he asked me to perform was to unplug the wire from the wall jack and modem, turn it end-for-end, and plug it back in. He said after several years of use, the wire can build up a static charge. Any MythBusters in the house? Best, Christopher

That makes a heck-of-a lot more sense. I kept asking him, are you serious? Static accumulates in the wire? He said to turn it around and it will reverse the static. I don't know if this is an official AT&T procedure or not. I suppose if you reverse the cable then you will knock off some of the corrosion, but it would have been easier to unplug and replug each end. Best, Christopher

Agreed. An installer should have a meter in their kit. A DIY can save money using a camera. Best, Christopher

That appears to be a session link. Best, Christopher

Yeah, at first glace, the *math* looks scary, but it's really just a table look-up, which can be done in a couple seconds. Also, just be aware there are lux meters and there a lux meters. Post a link to the meter you intend to purchase and we may be able to offer additional comments. Best, Christopher

Exposure Value (EV) is more common in photography, so first calculate the EV, then convert to Lux. Use the table here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exposure_value to calculate the EV. Note that Table 1 assumes ISO 100. Once you have calculated the EV, then convert to Lux. Here is one table here http://www.ndavidking.com/Tech%20Articles/EV%20to%20Lux%20conversion%20tables.pdf. Unfortunately, the table does not include low lux values, but it's easy to compute them. To extend the table to include lower values, subtract 1 from EV and divide Lux by 2. So, adding another row, EV -2 is Lux 0.75, for example. Hope that helps. Best, Christopher

You may already own a lux meter. All you need is a digicam capable of taking long exposures and a basic understanding of light. Take a picture, determine the exposure (combination of ISO, F stop, and shutter speed) and convert to lux. Best, Christopher

Five years ago I purchased a $4,400 lens, and a couple weeks ago I purchased a second. At almost $9,000 for the pair, these bionic lenses are worth every penny. I can read fine print and my distance vision is 20/20 without correction. Amazing! http://www.crystalens.com/ Best, Christopher

As a member of Kaiser HMO, I could have done each eye for a $50 co-pay, but I wanted a particular lens. Five years ago Kaiser had not yet started using the Crystalens, and this go round, I decided to use the same doctor. An expensive option, but the results are amazing. How many people can read and drive without correction at age 55? Best, Christopher

One artifact I noticed since putting up LED holiday lights is a slow phase shift between the camera and the lights. One camera detects motion when there is none. Rapid scrubbing of the recorded time line shows the intensity wax and wane, apparently due to phase shifts of shutter and LED flicker. Best, Christopher

My first guess would have been the battery, but if that was still intact, then perhaps the glass is under pressure from the case and/or internals and is waiting to pop. Best, Christopher

What is MSRP for the IQA25N? Do any forum members distribute them? Best, Christopher

Yep, I thought that might be the case. Thanks for the follow up. Best, Christopher

Work as an apprentice at a CCTV security installation company for one year. Best, Christopher

IMO this is a big waste of money. PTZ has its uses, but this isn't one of them. The money can be spent far more productively using more cameras, more resolution, and possibly other types of sensors integrated into the system such as PIRs, perimeter IR beams, security alarms, etc, depending on what you are trying to record and the assets you are trying to protect. Best, Christopher

Outdoor. Will also need a wall mount. Best, Christopher

I used to pay $800 a month for ISDN to my home. Best, Christopher

In my experience, the difference in detail between H.264 and MJPEG begins to widen in low light with movement. Can you post any examples comparing the detail of moving vehicles and/or people at night using these two codecs? Best, Christopher

Oh, I don't know, could it have been this ... ... punctuated with video of a bush. Best, Christopher

I repeat, you are trying to complicate this thread when the topic is really simple. Just use the best frame rate for each codec and post your results. If that's a high frame rate for H.264, then fine, use a high frame rate. " title="Applause" /> " title="Applause" /> " title="Applause" /> Thank you, thank you, thank you, for finally addressing the subject of the original thread. " title="Applause" /> " title="Applause" /> " title="Applause" /> Hello? Are you serious? I have done many controlled experiments comparing MJPEG and H.264 with moving vehicles and people in low light, and I posted an example in this thread. Who else besides me has posted even one example of a controlled experiment comparing these two codecs of moving objects in low light? So you posted videos of a bush? Let's do quick review, shall we. In another thread that began this discussion, I said that I use MJPEG because it provides more forensic detail in low light than H.264. Another forum member said H.264 provides as much detail as MJPEG, and further, that H.264 provides so much detail that you can't even tell the difference between the two codecs. Fine, I'm a student of CCTV and I'm willing to learn. Convince me. Show me some examples. But please don't show me images or videos of paint drying or bushes in the mid day sun. Post some examples of movement (vehicle or people) in low light that compares the detail of the two codecs. Best, Christopher

No need to get complicated. Yes, H.264 uses considerably less bandwidth and is a very compelling solution for many applications. However, assume you have a setup with sufficient bandwidth, disk space, and processing power to use any available codec and you want the best possible forensic detail. Which codec would you choose? Which codec will provide more detail, particularly in low light with movement? MJPEG or H.264? Best, Christopher

No need to get overly complicated. The claim is that H.264 captures the same detail as MJPEG. I propose the following simple test. Pick your favorite H.264 camera. Drive the same vehicle at the same speed through the field of view at night. Capture the scene using MJPEG and then again using H.264. Grab the best image from each codec and post them. Let us see if indeed H.264 can capture the same detail. Best, Christopher

I think he used power line Ethernet instead of WiFi, but yes, that was essentially the thread. Best, Christopher

Fair enough, please post an example of how to do that. Pick any H.264 MP camera of your choosing. Drive your vehicle by at night, once using MJPEG and once using H.264. Post the images with each codec, and let us review the detail in the two images. Best, Christopher

Yes, slow shutters result in a loss of detail, but that's not the question being asked. The question is, which codec provides more forensic detail in low light movement? MJPEG or H.264? Some are suggesting that H.264 compression is so good that you can't even tell the difference between MJPEG and H.264. What are your thoughts regarding that question? Best, Christopher