With the 1/3 exposure time, it's way more better than IR, is it harmfull for camera?

C

Cossie

Young grasshopper
Aug 29, 2015
75
2
When I set the IR leds on, flying bugs on the air keeps the camera always recording. I closed the IR leds, set the exposure time to 1/3. It's great now. No flying bugs, way more clean image, even the colors are true like in the daylight. My eyes can't see around the red car, it's nearly full dark. But the camera can see.

attachment.php


So why I need the IR leds? Is it harmfull for camera's CPU? (DS-2CD2032F-IW) Is there any problem with it when I keep this settings? Because I can't believe how it's great! :D
 

Attachments

  • 1-3 Pozlama.png
    1-3 Pozlama.png
    3.8 MB · Views: 231
Re: With the 1/3 exposure time, it's way more better than IR, is it harmfull for came

You dont need IR because you have enough artificial light. Its better your way. IR is only for places you want to keep dark. Its always better to use light and no IR.
 
Re: With the 1/3 exposure time, it's way more better than IR, is it harmfull for came

It's great for me! So is it not harmfull for the camera? Is the 1/3 setting needs more CPU power or overheating? Can it handle the load?
 
Re: With the 1/3 exposure time, it's way more better than IR, is it harmfull for came

Cossie said:
It's great for me! So is it not harmfull for the camera? Is the 1/3 setting needs more CPU power or overheating? Can it handle the load?
Click to expand...
No its not harmful at all. The 1/3 setting is actually the default the camera comes with.
 
Re: With the 1/3 exposure time, it's way more better than IR, is it harmfull for came

It may be best to walk test this to check that you get enough detail for your requirements - you may be surprised at the level of motion blur with this long exposure.
 
Re: With the 1/3 exposure time, it's way more better than IR, is it harmfull for came

alastairstevenson said:
It may be best to walk test this to check that you get enough detail for your requirements - you may be surprised at the level of motion blur with this long exposure.
Click to expand...
good point, i misread the exposure as 1/30...1/3 will likely be super blurry...
 
Re: With the 1/3 exposure time, it's way more better than IR, is it harmfull for came

alastairstevenson said:
It may be best to walk test this to check that you get enough detail for your requirements - you may be surprised at the level of motion blur with this long exposure.
Click to expand...

Yes you're right :( Walking at slow speed is visible but running person is looks like a ghost-man. No way to face recognition even for slow-speed walking. I've been expecting a handicap. It should be. That's why we still need IR leds, I found my answer. :(

So are there any ways to ignoring flying bugs for motion detection?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Re: With the 1/3 exposure time, it's way more better than IR, is it harmfull for came

IR illuminators are very cheap and pretty effective as a light source. Though they still do a good job of attracting and lighting up bugs, but a bit further away from the camera.
Some experimentation with optimising intrusion detection and line crossing detection, and reducing motion detection is probably called for.
 
Re: With the 1/3 exposure time, it's way more better than IR, is it harmfull for came

As a car moves you will see lots of ghosting behind the car, not the best of settings to be honest.
 
Re: With the 1/3 exposure time, it's way more better than IR, is it harmfull for came

Post an image at 1/30....a bit more light may make it workable ...
 
Re: With the 1/3 exposure time, it's way more better than IR, is it harmfull for came

alastairstevenson said:
IR illuminators are very cheap and pretty effective as a light source. Though they still do a good job of attracting and lighting up bugs, but a bit further away from the camera.
Some experimentation with optimising intrusion detection and line crossing detection, and reducing motion detection is probably called for.
Click to expand...

Here is an example video from DS-2CD2032-I:


The video is from my country, in the same climate. He said he has no special thing for keeping bugs away. Interesting.

fenderman said:
Post an image at 1/30....a bit more light may make it workable ...
Click to expand...

This is 1/25 exposure:
attachment.php


Too much noise I have but the licence plates are still readable on motion. If I have a NAS or NVR, I could turn on the IR and keep it recording all-night long but I have only 64GB micro-sd on it. If I buy a high-end router, can I record to a HDD on router's USB plug?
 

Attachments

  • 1-25 Pozlama.png
    1-25 Pozlama.png
    3.9 MB · Views: 187
Re: With the 1/3 exposure time, it's way more better than IR, is it harmfull for came

Was that a learner driver parking that car?
Nice clear night image though.
 
Re: With the 1/3 exposure time, it's way more better than IR, is it harmfull for came

whoslooking said:
Was that a learner driver parking that car?
Nice clear night image though.
Click to expand...

Mine is not that clear. Too noisy. May be due to distance I have, I think?
 
Re: With the 1/3 exposure time, it's way more better than IR, is it harmfull for came

The video is from my country, in the same climate. He said he has no special thing for keeping bugs away. Interesting.
Click to expand...
That's a very good example of a night-time street CCTV capability. Lots of detail and contrast, recognition of faces, smooth motion.
And no bugs ...
 
Re: With the 1/3 exposure time, it's way more better than IR, is it harmfull for came

Cossie said:
The video is from my country, in the same climate. He said he has no special thing for keeping bugs away. Interesting.
Click to expand...

Nice and clear, no bugs. Because, it looks like, this camera's IR lights are off, and the streetlamp or whatever that is ahead on the same side of the street, is providing enough light for good capture.
 
Re: With the 1/3 exposure time, it's way more better than IR, is it harmfull for came

That street image has lots of artificial light. You can see by the shadows cast by the people. You will need to add more light..also try running your camera in night mode (black and white) but disable the IR so you dont get bugs..it should be better than the color.
 
Re: With the 1/3 exposure time, it's way more better than IR, is it harmfull for came

fenderman said:
That street image has lots of artificial light. You can see by the shadows cast by the people. You will need to add more light..also try running your camera in night mode (black and white) but disable the IR so you dont get bugs..it should be better than the color.
Click to expand...

I haven't found a b/w mode in DS-2CD2032F-IW.
 
Re: With the 1/3 exposure time, it's way more better than IR, is it harmfull for came

Cossie said:
I haven't found a b/w mode in DS-2CD2032F-IW.
Click to expand...
set to night mode. Then disable IR. Advanced configuration>system>service uncheck enable IR light.
 
Re: With the 1/3 exposure time, it's way more better than IR, is it harmfull for came

fenderman said:
set to night mode. Then disable IR. Advanced configuration>system>service uncheck enable IR light.
Click to expand...

Helpful advice, thanks :D
attachment.php


Can you delete the PNG one, it is too big, waste of space.
 

Attachments

  • nightmode_on_ir_off.png
    nightmode_on_ir_off.png
    3.1 MB · Views: 19
  • nightmode_on_ir_off.jpg
    nightmode_on_ir_off.jpg
    650.1 KB · Views: 136
Re: With the 1/3 exposure time, it's way more better than IR, is it harmfull for came

if wdr is on, disable it or set it under 10...you can try playing with the noise reduction..add some LED lighting and the image will improve dramatically.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom