Webcam Surveillance System?

bagelpirate

So Im trying to set up a few webcams for surveillance, and I was hoping the collecting knowledge database that is h/a has had any expirience with this kind of thing.

First off, I need something with decent quality, enough to make out a face from a reasonable distance.

I need to buy a few of them, so I don't want to spend more than ~130 or so for each, but if I could keep it under $~100 that would be awesome.

Night time feature is a must, I'll need to be able to see people with low light (not no light, just low light)

Any recommendations on an app to run multiple cameras would be much appreciated aswell.

Also, how much space are we talking about here? I know I'll have to get an external HDD, but will 250gb be enough?

Any help will be awarded 5 Schrute Bucks.

blincoln

If you are looking for something that will work in low light, I would recommend one of the models that have a ring of infrared LEDs around the lens. That way you'll get the illumination of the area being photographed, but without a visible light source (unless someone is wearing night vision goggles), and the quality should be better than just amplifying the visible light would be.
I'd be interested in seeing other responses, as I've been tentatively thinking of setting up something similar.

bagelpirate

Could I just use infrared LEDs? or is the camera specifically made for the infrared LEDs?

blincoln

Generally if you want to use infrared illumination, you either need a camera designed for it, or you need to remove the IR-blocking filter from inside a regular camera (which will make the colours look funny in daylight, and it's easy to ruin the camera if you don't know what you're doing). Buying a camera that has the LEDs built in is probably a more reliable way to get better results, and I didn't notice them being significantly more expensive than other types of camera.

Thomamelas

bagelpirate wrote: »

So Im trying to set up a few webcams for surveillance, and I was hoping the collecting knowledge database that is h/a has had any expirience with this kind of thing.

First off, I need something with decent quality, enough to make out a face from a reasonable distance.

I need to buy a few of them, so I don't want to spend more than ~130 or so for each, but if I could keep it under $~100 that would be awesome.

Night time feature is a must, I'll need to be able to see people with low light (not no light, just low light)

Any recommendations on an app to run multiple cameras would be much appreciated aswell.

Also, how much space are we talking about here? I know I'll have to get an external HDD, but will 250gb be enough?

Any help will be awarded 5 Schrute Bucks.

I work for a company that does CCTV/IP camera capture software. I'm not going to plug the company but I do work in the industry.

Some notes, and if I appear to be harsh, it's because a half ass system is a waste of time and money that could have been better spent on other things.

1. Security Cameras are not Webcams. If you were thinking of taking a bunch of Linksys webcams and doing this project, just stop here. Webcams have cheap (crap) lenses and are generally have either a very limited focal range or a fixed focal range of a couple of feet. If you aren't within a couple of feet of the camera, you won't see squat. Webcams are designed for a single kind of use and it's not one that's compatible with security.

2. Budget. You get what you pay for. You can get analog cameras in your price range. They aren't going to be amazing. Don't expect facial recognition unless the person looks into the camera. Good analog is going to start at $300 MSRP (looking at the web can get you better deals) and about that price point for IP. You can get alot of cheap import stuff at that price range, it's going to range from udder crap to excellent value if your expectations are reasonable.

3. No CSI shit. In fact if you want a feature you saw on Law and Order or CSI then stop here. In the real world the amount of forensics work you can do with video is limited.

4. No E-bay. E-bay is fine if you understand what you're looking for. Give you six months in the industry and you'll be okay there. Anything less and you'll over pay for pirated or knock-off gear. It used to be very common to find the PICO boards on E-bay which use a pirated software that was buggy as hell. Call the company for support and they will flat out ask you if you got it on E-bay. If the answer is yes, then they will gladly tell you to go away.

5. Sony. You're going to see their name everywhere. They do have a CCTV division that makes some okay cameras. They are a little overpriced for their quality and fall into the midrange of the industry. But if you don't see Sony on the camera then the company is pulling a fast one on you. What they mean is that Sony made the CCD. Which isn't a big deal, they are the largest makers of CCD chips in the world. And you're going to get cheap Chinese junk electronics on the back end.

6. Don't use IR unless you need IR. If you spend the money on a good camera with a cut filter then you'll end up with washed out images.

7. Facial recognition. There are guidelines for how to do it. The general gist of the guidelines is what ever you're trying to identify needs to take up 1/3 of your image at 640 x 480. So when you calculate field of view, you need to take that into account. Unless you're going to go with a heck of alot of cameras, you will not get that as a feature.

8. The cameras will not deter crime. If someone is going to rob you the cameras may help catch them. It may help recover your stuff. It will not prevent you from being robbed.

9. Don't use fake cameras. It opens up all sorts of liability issues.

10. Think about camera placement. Think about how the lighting changes during the day. A camera blinded by the sun does you no good. A camera blinded by headlights does no good.

If you are looking for something that will work in low light, I would recommend one of the models that have a ring of infrared LEDs around the lens. That way you'll get the illumination of the area being photographed, but without a visible light source (unless someone is wearing night vision goggles), and the quality should be better than just amplifying the visible light would be.
I'd be interested in seeing other responses, as I've been tentatively thinking of setting up something similar.

IR LED in the 900mn range are visible to the naked eye. We can't see the light it gives off, but the bright red glow gives it away. On the low end of cameras it's pretty common. And IR can be very hit or miss. IR aimed at a pool/concrete/flat wall is useless. The IR illumanators just end up blinding the camera.

Mr_Grinch

I use webcammonitor, it's a crappy piece of software hooked up to a crappy webcam but at least if someone breaks in I'll be emailed a crappy picture of their (undoubtedly covered) crappy face.

But it makes me feel that tiny bit more secure.

blincoln

Thomamelas wrote: »

IR LED in the 900mn range are visible to the naked eye. We can't see the light it gives off, but the bright red glow gives it away.

I'm confused. If it gives off a bright red glow, that means you can see the light that it is giving off, which means that it's emitting visible light and not IR.

I do IR photography, and I have a couple of different devices with IR LEDs on them. None of them emit any visible light, even if you're looking directly at the LED.

embrik

blincoln wrote: »

Thomamelas wrote: »

IR LED in the 900mn range are visible to the naked eye. We can't see the light it gives off, but the bright red glow gives it away.

I'm confused. If it gives off a bright red glow, that means you can see the light that it is giving off, which means that it's emitting visible light and not IR.

I do IR photography, and I have a couple of different devices with IR LEDs on them. None of them emit any visible light, even if you're looking directly at the LED.

You're right blincoln, no human can see infrared light, period. Anything past 750 nm is invisible to the eye.
From Wikipedia:Infrared - "Infrared radiation has wavelengths between about 750 nm and 1 mm, spanning three orders of magnitude."

Also from Wikipedia:Visible Spectrum - "There are no exact bounds to the visible spectrum; a typical human eye will respond to wavelengths in air from 400 to 700 nm, although some people may be able to perceive wavelengths from 380 to 780 nm"

Edit: It's possible that the camera includes some non-infrared red LEDs to indicate the camera is on and functioning, but those LEDs would not be classified as IR.

blincoln

The only other thing I could think of that he might have meant was that a thermal IR emitter would potentially glow red, but:
- Thermal IR (as opposed to short-wave IR) is way outside the range of what a CCD can pick up. You need a specialized sensor, not just a regular camera that's been slightly modified.
- One of the main advantages of using thermal IR gear is that you don't need a source of illumination, because everything you're likely to image emits some amount of thermal IR.
- I'm pretty sure a thermal IR emitter would not come in the form of an LED.
- Thermal IR cameras are still very expensive (About $5000), so not practical for this application.
So yeah, that's why I was confused.
Just FYI, embrik, our eyes *do* have a very slight sensitivity to near/short-wave IR. It's usually only taken advantage of at night, but if you put NIR-bandpass filters over your eyes, wait 20-30 seconds for the irises to open all the way, and then go out in bright sunlight, you will be seeing in that part of the spectrum. It's not something you want to make a habit of, because you can easily hurt your eyes, but it does work - it's one of the first things I tried when I got my IR photography equipment. It's also not enough to see the light from an IR LED under normal circumstances.

embrik

blincoln wrote: »

Just FYI, embrik, our eyes *do* have a very slight sensitivity to near/short-wave IR. It's usually only taken advantage of at night, but if you put NIR-bandpass filters over your eyes, wait 20-30 seconds for the irises to open all the way, and then go out in bright sunlight, you will be seeing in that part of the spectrum. It's not something you want to make a habit of, because you can easily hurt your eyes, but it does work - it's one of the first things I tried when I got my IR photography equipment. It's also not enough to see the light from an IR LED under normal circumstances.

Cool, thanks for the info. *The more you know*

Thomamelas

blincoln wrote: »

Thomamelas wrote: »

IR LED in the 900mn range are visible to the naked eye. We can't see the light it gives off, but the bright red glow gives it away.

I'm confused. If it gives off a bright red glow, that means you can see the light that it is giving off, which means that it's emitting visible light and not IR.

I do IR photography, and I have a couple of different devices with IR LEDs on them. None of them emit any visible light, even if you're looking directly at the LED.

I should have been clearer and gotten my wavelengths right. It's the 740 to 800 nm range that can kinda be seen:

http://www.scansourcesecurity.com/ipcenter/files/InfraredIlluminator.pdf

It is a soft red glow but at night it sticks out like a sore thumb. You can not read by this light, nor is it going to help "seeing" things. But you will be able to spot the emitters pretty clearly.

Edit: It's possible that the camera includes some non-infrared red LEDs to indicate the camera is on and functioning, but those LEDs would not be classified as IR.

Only fake and IP cameras have LED's on the front to indicate "on/off". Analog cameras almost always mount that on the rear and use a green, rather then red LED if one is used at all. And even with IP cameras you only see the front "on/off" LED on lower end models and companies.

blincoln

Wow, strange, and definitely good to know. Thanks! I'm surprised they're even used as-is in that case, though. I would think the camera manufacturers would either use a lower-frequency LED, or cover the existing LEDs with an IR-bandpass filter. Even a DIY method like taping processed unshot slide film over them should block any visual light they emit.
Anyway, enough threadjacking.

Thomamelas

blincoln wrote: »

Wow, strange, and definitely good to know. Thanks! I'm surprised they're even used as-is in that case, though. I would think the camera manufacturers would either use a lower-frequency LED, or cover the existing LEDs with an IR-bandpass filter. Even a DIY method like taping processed unshot slide film over them should block any visual light they emit.
Anyway, enough threadjacking.

It's really something you see on the low end cameras. The cheap bullet style IR's are made extremely cheaply indeed. Anything, even film that raises their cost is avoided. If you start talking about real IR gear, like the kind produced by Extreme, you won't see that. But you're going to pay alot more for Extreme's gear.

Bagelpirate, the following questions can help:

Why are you putting in the system? Be as exact as possible.
What is your budget?