To: Superstev
I agree to a certain extent. The image quality from the nanny cams is usually quite poor. One could certainly question actions in court if the lighting is poor, subject is too far from the camera, the actions were discrete, no audio, etc... The nanny cams have caught several child abusers when the evidence was quite clear but in certain cases the images are subject to interpretation.
There have been many convenience store robbers let go because the video image from the store camera was of such poor quality due to old cameras, old reused tapes, poorly setup cameras, etc. Some banks are getting the idea however, I was in a Bank of America branch a few days ago and counted 13 cameras just looking at the teller row. They also had a large flat screen monitor hanging down that shows the image from one of the cameras. I work in video also and was impressed with the image quality on the monitor.
To: Sunnyvale CA Eng.
Wave of the future.
5 posted on
12/08/2003 3:59:59 AM PST by
samtheman
To: Sunnyvale CA Eng.
i'm glad to see there is still interest in this horrible situation. If I haven't said, this before I've been editing videos since 1986,studied tv production in college and now live in Los Angeles. In the 90's this would never be possible, because the cameras we're larger, non-digital, and shot in true real-time. When technology has shown us advances in almost all areas of life, it would sound odd, that a technological advancement would be a set-back. Well, the invention of digital cameras have advanced us in ways such as editing, special effects, size and portability. The camera the Schwartzes used was a digital camera, that is able to conserve space or "taping time", so well that it can record 24-48 hours before even running close to running out of space. It does this, by not recording every frame. In fact the camera only tapes when there is movement. What this means is that, when the nanny left the screen, the camera stopped and started as she came in view. The baby shaking scene was, so far from the sensor, that the camera was basically flickering. The camera couldn't tell if someone was in the shot or not. An excellent example of this would be a digital phone versus a home phone. Anyone who has ATT, T-mobile should know about dropped calls or choppy calls. A real video camera would show all frames such as the one in Van Nuys at the court house.
13 posted on
12/11/2003 7:52:50 AM PST by
Superstev
(innocent)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson