BoobieCam image distortion

[CanCuba]

Finally got around to installing the BoobieCam. I'll post the entire installation process in a couple days. You can see how I worked out what lenses I wanted in this post.

I'm having image distortion issues when I install the cover with the glass domes. We adjust the lenses so that the flat part of the dome, where it connects to the metal body, isn't in view which was our initial issue. The 3.6mm lenses were swapped for a 6mm and 8mm lens in channels 1 and 2 respectively. The process to get to these focal lengths is in the post I liked above.

This is the first channel with the 6mm lens:



The image is out of focus towards the edges but is quite in focus in the middle.

The second channel with the 8mm lens:



This seems less out of focus but still has some issues.

Note, the image is fine without the glass domes so I'm sure it's the glass domes which are causing the issue.

The second channel I can almost live with. You can see I have 500+ face captures. I had 4 when I woke up at 7am so that's an average of over 80 face captures an hour.

Of course, running the cam without the cover isn't realistic as it's outdoors. Should I go back to the factory 3.6mm lenses? Not the end of the world but the idea of replacing the lenses was that I would have a narrower field of view with only the front door and the gate in view. Makes the face captures results better (more pixels) which provides greater detail.

Anyone have any suggestions?

 

[Perimeter]

Second picture: Up the bitrate at H264 perhaps.

The first channel blur is independent of dome?
If so, I'd say perhaps your thin DOF is on the middle, left is too far, right is too close.

Drop sharpening to zero for another look perhaps?

 

[CanCuba]

Second picture: Up the bitrate at H264 perhaps.

The first channel blur is independent of dome?
If so, I'd say perhaps your thin DOF is on the middle, left is too far, right is too close.

Both channels are:

h.264H @ 8192 kbps
5 fps
5 i-frame

The Amazon listing doesn't have the f-stop for that lens and it's too hot to get out there and take the cover off again to see if it's on the lens itself. May go back to the factory 3.6mm and just live with it. But it was nowhere near as pronounced before putting the cover on. Perhaps the lens cover is exasperating the shallow FOV?

Fortunately, even with the distortion, the face captures are clear enough. I mean, the 6mm lens doubles the resolution of the 3.6mm lens.

Going to have to experiment a bit, I fear.

 

[Perimeter]

As the dome is curved, it will change rays that will not come perpendicular to the glas surface. With a 90° view of the 3.6mm, this may actually work with little distortion. But if you have rays going through the dome at different angles to the surface, it might cause trouble. I just wonder how zoom domes would avoid that problem?

 

[CanCuba]

As the dome is curved, it will change rays that will not come perpendicular to the glas surface. With a 90° view of the 3.6mm, this may actually work with little distortion. But if you have rays going through the dome at different angles to the surface, it might cause trouble. I just wonder how zoom domes would avoid that problem?

Excellent question! Are there zoom domes?

I can now appreciate people's dislike for dome cameras. They seem like a terrible idea considering the distortion.

 

[biggen]

Excellent question! Are there zoom domes?

I can now appreciate people's dislike for dome cameras. They seem like a terrible idea considering the distortion.

Put me in the camp of hating dome cameras. There is nothing a dome can do that a turret/eyeball cant do better.

 

[CanCuba]

Put me in the camp of hating dome cameras. There is nothing a dome can do that a turret/eyeball cant do better.

Unfortunately, domes seem to be the best solution for the BoobieCam with it's capability to orient the lenses as the user desires. Comes with a huge trade-off apparently.

 

[biggen]

Unfortunately, domes seem to be the best solution for the BoobieCam with it's capability to orient the lenses as the user desires. Comes with a huge trade-off apparently.

Yeah I’d either go with the new 4K 180 stitched cam or use two 5442 cameras before I used the boobie cam if I’m honest. Just seen too many underwhelming reports with it.

 

[CanCuba]

Yeah I’d either go with the new 4K 180 stitched cam or use two 5442 cameras before I used the boobie cam if I’m honest. Just seen too many underwhelming reports with it.

The 4K-180 doesn't do face detection. That would have been my first choice. 2x5442 would be bigger than the BoobieCam and much more expensive. Especially considering I got it from Andy as a refurb for less than half of retail.

It has a great form factor but the processor is underpowered for running two channels and those bloody domes are a PITA.

Going to put the 3.6mm back in channel one (the door side) and see how it looks. Hope I can do it without dismounting the camera.

Swapping the lenses was good in theory.

 

[biggen]

It has a great form factor but the processor is underpowered for running two channels and those bloody domes are a PITA.

This is what I mean. I'd rather spend more money and have more/larger cams that put up with one that is limited from the get go. I understand everyone has different budgets so that is not always an option.

 

[CanCuba]

This is what I mean. I'd rather spend more money and have more/larger cams that put up with one that is limited from the get go. I understand everyone has different budgets so that is not always an option.

But for $95 (or whatever I paid for the refurb), it's been great. Running 5 fps gets me the facial detection I want and much more. This is the first full day it's been mounted and running. I believe we're well over 1000 face detections just on the second channel which faces the street.

The only issue the image distortion but that's my doing having swapped the lenses out. Can't really complain for under $100.

 

[Perimeter]

What do you do with a thousand faces?

 

[CanCuba]

It puts the lotion on its skin or it gets a 4K Reolink kit!

 

[looney2ns]

Can you take the dome off and slightly tweak the focus, then replace the dome and test?
You might be able to find the sweat spot with some trial/error.

 

[Gimmons]

I have three, but none of them sees direct sunlight. I get no dome problems during the day, but at night the IR glares if I have it on. Wittaj says he can adjust the rubber washers to block the IR. I haven't managed to do it, but maybe they could be adjusted to block the sun glare you're getting? Or maybe an external baffle? Or just move them where the sun won't hit them.

 

[Ri22o]

I have three, but none of them sees direct sunlight. I get no dome problems during the day, but at night the IR glares if I have it on. Wittaj says he can adjust the rubber washers to block the IR. I haven't managed to do it, but maybe they could be adjusted to block the sun glare you're getting? Or maybe an external baffle? Or just move them where the sun won't hit them.

I was thinking this too. Maybe a shade of some sort?

 

[CanCuba]

Can you take the dome off and slightly tweak the focus, then replace the dome and test?
You might be able to find the sweat spot with some trial/error.

Excellent idea! I may play around with that tomorrow if I have some time.

Thanks for the suggestion!

 

[CanCuba]

I have three, but none of them sees direct sunlight. I get no dome problems during the day, but at night the IR glares if I have it on. Wittaj says he can adjust the rubber washers to block the IR. I haven't managed to do it, but maybe they could be adjusted to block the sun glare you're getting? Or maybe an external baffle? Or just move them where the sun won't hit them.

The issue isn't so much sun glare. The camera doesn't get sun until about 1pm this time of year.

It's a matter of having the lenses turned almost all the way out.

The image of the door has more pronounced distortion since, I believe, it's turned father out as the came is closer to the door than the gate.

Initially, I had the lens turned even father out and it was catching the very small, maybe 2mm or 3mm, flat edge of the dome where it connects to the body. This part of the image was terrible until I adjusted it.

As previously discussed, swapping the factory lenses out has probably exasperated this issue.

I like what @looney2ns suggested in that I adjust the focus to try and compensate for the distortion.

And I wouldn't even dare to turn IR on. S9me of the IR LEDs are pointed into the body and it would be a nightmare.

 

[Gimmons]

Hmmm. Mine are pointed nearly 180 degrees apart, but the lenses are 2.6 and 3.6s.

 

[CanCuba]

Hmmm. Mine are pointed nearly 180 degrees apart, but the lenses are 2.6 and 3.6s.

So it must be the non-factory lenses which are causing the distortion. But I'm getting the results I'm looking for so I may leave things as they are. Going to post some captures now from different distances.