Q-See 1.3M IP cam comments

[Machineman 0]

I got a pair of these QCN7001B IP cams from costco without the NVR. Will wait to get the 8 or 16ch NVR.

 

Good:

Daytime images are clear

Email SSL works, gmail etc.

IR night vison is decent

Q-See Iphone app works for remote viewing

Dual stream is nice for remote access at lower bandwidth.

Can send email images and record locally for the same event.

Solid chassis and mount pedastal

Can easily change the lense (per other thread)

Can back-up the settings config. (With the exception of the netwrok details)

Can block out area's for motion detection.

 

What I don't like(some maybe specific to my needs):

IR lights are very visable, can't turn them off.

Motion sensativity of 1(lowest) still triggers lots of events. This is just looking at a motionless backyard.

The UI setting names are poor. You need to play with them to see what they do.

The RJ45 connector is not weather proof.

There is no Guest Live view, always need to log-in.

No live view still(snapshot) option. Meaning when you log-in its streaming.

No motion detection sensativty screen. Need to physically go to the camera and cause motion to test.

Time and name overlays are poor looking

The Manual could use some more detail for the settings. Also the cam Manual is written for NVR use.

 

I think these cams are good for the price but have more potential with some firmware improvements.

[buellwinkle 0]

Its funny that you say motion detection is too sensitive because this camera records 2-3x more events than 1080P and 3MP cameras from the same manufacturer. Complain to Q-See in So Cal. The more complaints they get, the more likely they are to fix it. My biggest pet peeve is it has terrible white balance while their other cameras are perfect.

 

Also, don't know what you mean that IR is visible, IR light is invisible or are you talking about the pink glow you get on the IR LEDs, because that's normal regardless of the brand, heck, I installed an $800 illuminator that glows brighter than most cameras have built in. You can turn that off pretty easily on that camera, just set the camera to DAY mode instead of auto, that turns the IR LEDs off.

[Machineman 0]

Its funny that you say motion detection is too sensitive because this camera records 2-3x more events than 1080P and 3MP cameras from the same manufacturer. Complain to Q-See in So Cal. The more complaints they get, the more likely they are to fix it. My biggest pet peeve is it has terrible white balance while their other cameras are perfect.

 

Also, don't know what you mean that IR is visible, IR light is invisible or are you talking about the pink glow you get on the IR LEDs, because that's normal regardless of the brand, heck, I installed an $800 illuminator that glows brighter than most cameras have built in. You can turn that off pretty easily on that camera, just set the camera to DAY mode instead of auto, that turns the IR LEDs off.

 

I can't find a "Day" mode setting. The pull down is titled "Day & Night" and the options are; Auto, Color, Black & White, and by period. None of those shut the IR led's off. Seems like its only controlled by the light sensor.

 

The red glow at night will be an issue for a couple spots I want to put these cameras. Its in a rural area at the end of a long driveway so I want them to be hiiden rather then used as target practice. These IR LED's must be in the lower end of the IR spectrum. Above 900nm and they start to be invisible. I have a Game camera that has an invisible IR flash, the LED's are covered by some tinted film. Wonder what material that is and if I can put it over the Q-SEE led's. Probably with some loss in intensity.

Game cam with invisble IR http://bushnell.com/all-products/trail-cameras/trophy-cam/trophy-cam-hd-max

[buellwinkle 0]

Day = Color, put it in color mode and the IR illuminators shouldn't come on. I've heard of higher wave length IR illuminators but have never seen them. Not all image sensors are sensitive to the higher wave length. I asked Raytec, one of the largest illuminator companies and they said you will still see a glow.

 

The problem is if you turn off the IR illuminators, you will likely see nothing unless you have the area well lit with white light. A better camera, same price, is the 1080P mini dome made by Dahua and also sold by Q-See. It's double the resolution, but does not have illuminators. Has a pseudo day/night, but really it's a day camera. Slightly more sensitive in low light than the mini-bullet you have.

 

As for the Bushnell, first, it's a still camera, not video, it uses IR LEDs as flash, not continous. If you flashed regular leds for 1/6th of a second (their claim), you probably wouldn't not notice it. Animals are more sensitive to the IR wavelength than humans, so I can see the use of them as a flash as being appropriate for what Bushnell intended them for. Also, they are using a PIR motion detector which you can't do with the mini-bullet, it doesn't have alarm i/o to attach one. Without the PIR motion detector, the camera can't see in the dark and you'll get no motion events. Cool camera though for wildlife enthusiasts.

Edited January 13, 2013 by Guest

[Machineman 0]

Cool camera though for wildlife enthusiasts.

Yep, I have a few game cams on the cabin site around the woods. Good night/day pics of bears, mountain lions, etc.. Just wish they would make a game cam with IP, POE, and email events. Need to pull the SD card to see what got caught. I really don't need the video, just images of whats happening. All the IP cams I have(axis, panasonic) I use just for the email of motion images.

[Kawboy12R 0]

I can't see any glow with this illuminator. It's never in absolute complete darkness but it is mounted under my deck 60-70 feet from a streetlight that has a tall spruce tree blocking light in that direction. If it glows it is verrrry dim.

[Machineman 0]

That illuminator uses wavelength 940nm LED's which are near invisable. Last year I ordereed some 940nm LED's from digikey and replaced the visible light LED's in some garden solar lights. The lights were invisible and the cam could see them at night but didn't really light up more than 1 foot around the light. I bet that illuminator works good. The Q-See cam likely uses LED's at 850nm or less.

 

I'm playing around with filtering the Q-See LED's. First option is using an old floppy disk film. I cut it out and put in front of the LED's. Left a hole for the night sensor. you can't see the Red glow anymore unless you get really close and even then its very dim. It also passes enough IR so the cam can still see at night. However the distance is reduced. Need to do some more testing.

 

[buellwinkle 0]

You can get filter gels from photography stores. A gel is like a colored cellophane used in photography, many times to put over lights to get colored effects, but they have different shades of gray you may be able to experiment with. Here's just an example, but your local camera shop may have them.

 

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/44592-REG/Rosco_RS9811_98_Filter_Medium.html

[MaxIcon 0]

The Dahua 1.3MP cams won't turn off the IR, even when left in color mode at night; presumably the QSee are the same. Another of their quirky software things. Dunno what they're thinking.

 

When I was doing comparisons, I had to unplug the Dahua to turn the IR off so it wouldn't add extra illumination for the other cams.

[buellwinkle 0]

Never noticed that but I just played with it and it's true, the sensor for the IR lights has nothing to do with the IR cut filter. Can you just unplug the circuit board that has the IR LED ring?

[dexterash 0]

as for IR filtering, some filter could be made using a blank film that's been developed (also called an IR pass filter)

 

Here's how:

http://www.pixiq.com/article/create-your-own-ir-filter

[KyleK29 0]

I wouldn't expect the RJ45 to be waterproof, I think if you're mounting the connector outside of the wall it should probably be in some form of enclosure or electrical box.

[buellwinkle 0]

He's not trying to bypass the IR, he's trying to get rid of the red glow that 850nm IR LEDs give off. He suggestted 940nm which still give off a slight glow but much less than 850nm IR LEDS. If the soldering skills are up to task, one could remove all the LEDs and solder in 940nm LEDs. The reason nobody puts 940nm LEDs in their product is you need like 3-4x more LEDs to produce the same amount of light but that's not his goal, he's OK with a lot less light in return for no having the red glow. His other thought is to mask it with something opaque, where he still gets some of the effect of the IR LEDs but enough to lose the glow.

 

The other choice I just though of is to tint the LEDs or the glass with a smoke color, like kids do with car taillights where they smoke the red plastic so they look black during the day, but still lightup at night.

 

as for IR filtering, some filter could be made using a blank film that's been developed (also called an IR pass filter)

 

Here's how:

http://www.pixiq.com/article/create-your-own-ir-filter

[dexterash 0]

With all due respect, I posted a solution to IRPASS and filter other light! Exactly the opposite of what you said (I've never said bypassing IR light, solution will let it pass and filter "normal" light).

 

If you tint anything, you will tint the IR spectrum too...

[ak357 0]

With all due respect, I posted a solution to IRPASS and filter other light! Exactly the opposite of what you said (I've never said bypassing IR light, solution will let it pass and filter "normal" light).

 

If you tint anything, you will tint the IR spectrum too...[/quote]

 

+1

that funny

[dexterash 0]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infrared_photography

 

You can always tint it different

 

+2

[ak357 0]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infrared_photography

 

You can always tint it different

 

+2

First u have to remember grade 12 science

under condition u actually finish high school

[dexterash 0]

My small knowledge says like this: if we use a (somekind of) filter that will only permit IR light and will reject any visible light, we'll get an IR image.

 

If we apply that to IR LEDs, we'll get a filter that will not let the visible part pass, but will let the non visible part.

 

And, btw, have you check the film-filter sort of thing? Ever? At least, just for fun?

[Machineman 0]

Yes, all correct. I want to mask the visable red glow but still pass the invisible IR. The floppy disk media is kind of like the photo film where it has a dark red tint. It seems to be working at the cost of some distance. If I can find some film laying around I might try that also. For now I will install the cam with the floppy disk media.

[dexterash 0]

get a new film and get it developed... should be cheap, if you're not satisfied

 

Not "any" film will work

[MaxIcon 0]

Here's a thread with actual spectral images of various solutions, like negative film and floppy disks:

http://nuigroup.com/forums/viewthread/6458/

 

Now, the real issue is that most monochromatic LEDs have a fairly narrow bandwidth around the primary wavelength, as seen in the pic below, so an IR LED doesn't have a big color spread. With an 850nm LED source, by the time you've cut out the visible part, you've also cut out much of the output of the LED.

 

Toss in the fact that not everybody's visual spectral response is the same (just like not everyone hears 20Hz-20kHz the same, or is at 98.6 degrees body temp), and it muddies the water even more.

 

Likewise, every cam sensor has a different spectral response curve, so what works well with one sensor may not work well with another (and the lens coatings can affect this as well). Since sensitivity is dropping steadily as you go to higher wavelengths, the 940nm LEDs need more radiated power to give the same illumination for a given sensor.

 

I won't even go into the difficulty of measuring actual IR output (it's not by LED power or number of LEDs), as it's been discussed here before.

 

Here's a small pic illustrating the basic issue here, from this site:

 

http://www.ccs-grp.com/s2_ps/s1/s_02/ir/index.html

[Machineman 0]

Nice data in that first link! Shows that Photography film is a very good option. Any idea if the photo film in those tests was unused and developed?

[MaxIcon 0]

There are 2 ways you can do it. The goal is to have black negatives.

 

- Slide film, which is positive film, unexposed and developed. Leave it in the can, and have it developed. Since it's positive film, unexposed areas are dark, and block visible light. 120 film is bigger than 35mm and has no sprocket holes, if that matters.

 

- Negative film, exposed and developed. Pull it out of the can, leave it in normal indoor lighting for 5-10 seconds, wind it back in, and have it developed. Since it's negative film, exposed areas are dark, and show up as white when printed.

 

If you've ever done film photography and have negative strips around, the first inch or so (the leader) are almost always black due to exposure.

[buellwinkle 0]

Has anyone done this with film and can post before/after images?