Problem with Motion Detection - Bugs at Night

[shaywood 0]

I typically have 100+ motion detections at night. Is there software that I can use to detect better movement while still using my QC444 DVR?

 

I looked at Vitamin D's website, it says the software works with WebCams and IP Cameras. My cameras are all hard wired to my DVR.

[GrouchoBoucho 0]

this is the best you can expect from the cheap gear you got.

[shaywood 0]

Not sure I understand. Are you saying that vitamin D can work somehow, or I can't do anything because of my equipment.

[Toaster 0]

The last time I asked this question, what was suggested to me was getting some PIR motion detectors, and hard wiring those to your DVR. As I recall the QC444 is actually a Dahua made DVR, and should have some sensor inputs... so instead of using the built in video motion detection, you can use a real motion detector which would help a lot.

 

What I did on my systems, using video motion detection is, map out any high traffic areas, so only the protected area is actually monitored, and adjust your sensitivity down to an acceptable level, to reduce false but still triggers on a positive / actual motion.

 

As an example, for my parking lot at the store, I mapped OUT the street so passing cars wouldn't set it off, but if you pulled IN TO the parking lot driveway, it would go off... and of course any motion ON the parking lot sets it off.. now the only false alarms I get are from rain............ but in Texas that's not a problem just look at my lawn in front of my house... its basically HAY!!!!!! LOL

 

Hope that helps.

[Toaster 0]

this is the best you can expect from the cheap gear you got.

 

That particular DVR he has is made by Dahua. It might be inexpensive, but its not "cheap". Rory helped me figure out which model it was, and he was pretty impressed with it (as I recall)

[shaywood 0]

I agree, its excellent otherwise.

[GrouchoBoucho 0]

this is the best you can expect from the cheap gear you got.

 

That particular DVR he has is made by Dahua. It might be inexpensive, but its not "cheap". Rory helped me figure out which model it was, and he was pretty impressed with it (as I recall)

problem isn't the dvr, problem is ir cameras. lose the cheap cams, use good day/nite cams, add separate illuminators as a last resort

[shockwave199 0]

IR or no IR, if there's light around the general area you will get motion events- even if it's just bugs whizzing by towards a light out yonder. You can try to adjust the sensitivity down some. You can mask out areas that don't need to specifically pick up motion. And you can jump for joy if you're in a region that gets a cold winter, when all the little bastards DIE, DIE! MUUUWWWWAAA! Other than that, cameras are in their world, and they move in their world. Do as bet you can and that's it. Good luck.

[Toaster 0]

I've got a little cheapy ir camera at my house, and those ir must get super hot, because of all the cameras at my house, this one in particular - SPIDERS LOVE IT. During the hot months (which in texas is damn near year round) spiders LOVE to make webs across the lens of that camera.. And its because of bugs, PLACEMENT must be considered. I saw some samples from a guy who mounted a camera at the peak of his exterior roof line... The fov was huge, he could see just about anything going on at his house, his neighbors, across the street, next door.. maybe even a block over and I remember telling him cleaning that is going to be a problem. He pm'd me back later on telling me he eventually moved it because it just too damn hard to clean on any kind of schedule.

[yakky 0]

My IR cams definitely get 10x the hits at night compared to a CNB TDN camera (24VF series). IMO its only an issue if you review footage on a regular basis. If you review footage based on real events, it is not a problem.

[shockwave199 0]

The issue becomes somehow, you need to see in darkness or very low light. Somehow or another this needs to happen. 'Great low light cameras' is nice to say, but they don't come without a price either. Sometimes it means a very noisy picture in low light. Sometimes it means a noise free picture in low light, but the picture is too dark to be useful- to see anything. Sometimes it means the camera has some digital 'effects' to make the picture look well lighted and noise free, but at the expense of severe motion blur. I haven't seen that 'great low light camera' do the business of seeing in very low without some kind of the sacrifices I mention, minus some kind of light support- be it conventional light or IR light. Conventional light will attract ton 'o bugs. Motion light could be an option, but that leaves the area vulnerable in total darkness a majority of the time. Not to mention, the best of the 'low light cameras' still won't help you in total darkness. It also leaves you depending on the motion lights faithfully picking up motion, which can sometimes be a hit or miss proposition. And when they do come blasting on, sure as hell the cameras get blasted out white picture too, which can wipe out a chance at ID. Separate IR fixtures could be good but let's face it, cheap ones suck balls. At that point you may as well have the IR in the camera. And as good an idea as separate fixtures are, it's more installation labor too. Hanging a camera is often all the installation anyone wants to be concerned with.

 

So, hello cameras with IR. They have their own annoyances with spider attraction. But in the long run, they can be convenient. They can illuminate a very dark area for general viewing, and for ID. And they can be smart IR and adjust themselves for better ID brightness. It really depends on each location and each install. You can't just universally proclaim- get 'good low light cameras' as a solution every time. What you can say is, whatever option you choose, get quality. Otherwise it won't really be helpful.

 

My ptz, an excellent low light camera with the IR off-

 

 

Nice noise free picture and will see things even in that low light. But it'll have a hard time ID'ing anyone.

 

Same camera with it's IR on mid brightness-

 

 

THAT will help ID someone. Point being, a 'good low light camera' on it's own with no light support will be a challenge for ID. It's nice to say 'good low light with TDN', but it's not a given that will help at all.

Edited September 1, 2012 by Guest

[thewireguys 3]

This is why you don't use cameras with built-in IR. Keep the IR away from the camera and the bugs will stay away.

[GrouchoBoucho 0]

I haven't seen that 'great low light camera' do the business of seeing in very low without some kind of the sacrifices I mention, minus some kind of light support- be it conventional light or IR light. Conventional light will attract ton 'o bugs.

that's why you don't mount it right on top of the camera.

 

Motion light could be an option, but that leaves the area vulnerable in total darkness a majority of the time.

vulnerable to what? if there's nothing creeping around to turn on the motion light, there's nothing to be recorded.

 

Separate IR fixtures could be good but let's face it, cheap ones suck balls.

and cheap ir cameras don't???

 

At that point you may as well have the IR in the camera.

and that's better, how? cheap ir is cheap ir, but at least if you're separating it from the camera, you're drawing the bugs away from the field of view.

 

So, hello cameras with IR. They have their own annoyances with spider attraction. But in the long run, they can be convenient.

"convenient", that's your key word. you're trading off effectiveness for convenience... which pretty much describes the whole industry.

[GrouchoBoucho 0]

This is why you don't use cameras with built-in IR. Keep the IR away from the camera and the bugs will stay away.

but... that's not convenient enough!

[thewireguys 3]

Customers don't pay me for convenient... they pay me for a solution that works.

[shockwave199 0]

I haven't seen that 'great low light camera' do the business of seeing in very low without some kind of the sacrifices I mention, minus some kind of light support- be it conventional light or IR light. Conventional light will attract ton 'o bugs.

that's why you don't mount it right on top of the camera.

But then how will you get your ID shot when they look at the motion light that pops on- a popular thing to suggest

Motion light could be an option, but that leaves the area vulnerable in total darkness a majority of the time.

vulnerable to what? if there's nothing creeping around to turn on the motion light, there's nothing to be recorded.

Darkness makes your property vulnerable to falling prey for being a good choice in the first place. Crooks didn't start the life yesterday. You don't think they're in the 'dark' about motion lights do you? Does anyone really think that motion lights coming on makes someone intent on vandalizng or stealing run like a girl in fear? Constant light deters. Darkness draws in.

Separate IR fixtures could be good but let's face it, cheap ones suck balls.

and cheap ir cameras don't???

Garbage IR cameras, true. Inexpensive doesn't always mean garbage.

 

At that point you may as well have the IR in the camera.

and that's better, how? cheap ir is cheap ir, but at least if you're separating it from the camera, you're drawing the bugs away from the field of view.

I agree, but I've seen very decent IR cameras with a good strong spread. I see cheap IR fixtures give nothing more than a flashlights worth of spread. But I do agree that a good IR fixture will help keep the camera itself clear.

So, hello cameras with IR. They have their own annoyances with spider attraction. But in the long run, they can be convenient.

"convenient", that's your key word. you're trading off effectiveness for convenience... which pretty much describes the whole industry.

It's not a trade off by default. To suggest IR cameras can't be effective is short sighted, imo. I'm just suggesting that the old low light camera mantra does not always mean a reduction in motion detection OR the best picture for ID in low light.

[phico 0]

see here .. I have just found a trick that solves it :

 

http://www.cctvforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=35921