On Wed, Aug 01, 2007 at 07:02:26PM +1000, Amos Shapira wrote: > I might be wrong but I got the impression that at least some of those > "motion detection" programs are geared more towards "change in frame" - i.e. > if the current frame contains exactly the same info as the previous one then > toss it. It saves both space/bandwidth (e.g. the English guy who caught a > burglar a few years ago by streaming webcam over the net from his apartment) > as well as your time looking for the interesting frames.
For the case I need, it would be only useful part of the time. Most of the time there is activity, it is normal activity and does not need to be recorded except for historical purposes, such as finding a crust of bread under a chair and trying to find out who was eating it. Determining that it was someone eating and not someone reading, or doing their homework or moving their hands while talking is probably far beyond anything available, During off hours, it would be useful to record at one frame a second, so that would give you 2 minutes of video an hour. Not a lot to watch if it was needed to determine who was present. There is no need for detailed videos of someone emptying trash cans, washing the floor, etc, and even if something nefarious was commited a video record of their presence is enough. IMHO the knowledge that the cameras are active 24/7 and recorded would be enough to prevent pranks or minor vandalism. Geoff. -- Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel [EMAIL PROTECTED] N3OWJ/4X1GM IL Voice: (07)-7424-1667 U.S. Voice: 1-215-821-1838 Visit my 'blog at http://geoffstechno.livejournal.com/ ================================================================= To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
