Re: Camera Mirror Setup

[Jim Davis <alarminex@xxxxxxx>]

On Monday, November 27, 2017 at 9:20:40 AM UTC-5, ABLE1 wrote:
> On 11/26/2017 8:50 PM, E D wrote:
>  > Hi Les,
>  >
>  > The units that I used were TP-LINK AV2000 2-PORT gigabit pass-thru
> Powerline starter kit. It uses the latest AV2 standard, allows 4k HD
> streaming. It does claim up to 2000Mbps Powerline speed, about $90 or
> so. MODEL # PA9020P KIT
>  >
>
> Interesting!!  I tried a Trendnet product a number of years ago to
> transmit Ethernet in a old house.  It failed.................
> Units are on my "pile" as I type.
> Maybe TP-LINK got it right.
>
>  > You mentioned that the light poles are all controlled by a photo-cell
> and timer. Does that mean that each pole has its own photo-cell or are
> they using one photo-cell for all the pole lights? Are the poles wired
> one to another, or are they each home-run to a building box?
>  >
> All wiring for light poles returns to the Electrical Closet.  There is
> one photocell that controls the pole lights through a relay that is
> energized.  Not sure if there is a timer involved as well.  I originally
> was looking at the project to use the poles thinking they had photocells
> on each.  That was not to be once I talked to the electrician.
>
>  > Sorry if I digress, but is anyone actually going to view this camera
> at night? I do not see how you could ever possibly get any quality
> picture out of this setup at night.
>  >
> I agree no nighttime viewing.  Doesn't make sense.
>
>  > In regards to your questions about other issues I may foresee, I
> think best to summarize it this way.
>  >
>  > ---The human eye can see up to 1000fps. The megapixel equivalent
> numbers below refer to the spatial detail in an image that would be
> required to show what the human eye could see when you view a scene. 90
> degrees * 60 arc-minutes/degree * 1/0.3 * 90 * 60 * 1/0.3 = 324,000,000
> pixels (324 megapixels). 120 * 120 * 60 * 60 / (0.3 * 0.3) = 576 megapixels.
>  >
>  > 1. You are reducing the natural pixel view of the roof scene with a
> measurement of about 105' wide and with an angle of about 71 degrees
> down to an area of the convex rectangular mirror which is 20" x 30" with
> a viewing distance of 35 ft.
>  >
>  > 2. You are then using camera optics from 60' away to see that 4.2
> square feet of view on the convex mirror and are re-amplifying digitally
> for viewing to the dvr.
>  >
>  > 3. The mirror is not the quality that NASA uses, nor is it in the
> vacuum of space. Meaning- spatial distortion highly probable, air
> turbulence assured.
>  >
>  > It is kind of like a guy who is using 2 sets of binoculars taped end
> to end, so that he first reduces the view and then re-enlarges it.
>  >
> That is a lot to digest, but I get it.
>
>  > I think that the concept will loose a greater amount of definition
> that is presently anticipated. But, since there is a 30-day money back
> return on that mirror, I would get it and do this in a controlled
> environment at home  or shop, and see what I would get as a view on the
> dvr with the camera that you are envisioning to purchase. I definitely
> would not be trying this out onsite first.
>  >
> I agree, but doubt that I will test it.  The above gives me reason for
> concern that it will be difficult to get it right.
>
>
>  > If I was the owner, and I had been stuck paying for one or more
> liability claim/lawsuit, I would gladly pay to rewire that pole. The
> wiring is probably in pipe anyway. So who designed this roof anyway?
> Must have been some Florida contractor who relocated to your area.
>  >
> I agree on the Florida connection, maybe.  Since we call those that
> transplant to Florida "Snowbirds" then this guy would be called a
> "Sunshiner" or "Sandflea" of something else??
>
>  > I'd love to see how it turns out for you.
>  >
> I will attempt to keep all in the loop.
> Thanks for all the extra input.
>
> Have a good week.
>
> Les

WOW!   FABULOUS THREAD !!!!!!!!!!!!

BRAVO TO ALL !!!!!!!!!!!!